Sunday, June 5, 2011

Draft Profile: Adam Larsson

Any fool can see that Adam Larsson is a tough player for the Oilers to pass over at #1 overall. His wide range of skills and his size (6.03, 200) for this age is impressive.

Larsson's scouting report reads like a fictional defensive character, smooth and controlled and never a spent force. ISS puts it nicely when saying "smooth and perfectly well rounded 2-way player with maturity well beyond his years."

Adam Larsson could be a franchise defender, but even if he comes up short on that, it's likely he'll have a long and productive career.

If the Oilers were a more mature organization, I think Larsson would be a better draft prospect. If a club like Detroit selected Larsson, they could bring him along slowly, like the Habs did with Savard, Lapointe and Robinson. Some time in the minors, depth sorties at the NHL level and finally extended time in the top 4 blue.

The Oilers have no such luxury. Larsson is a plug and play and would no doubt stand out in the Oiler crowd on the backline. If the Oilers could be counted on to send Larsson to the AHL this fall, I'd like the idea of picking him with the top pick more; the reality is that Larsson would be in the linup opening night if Edmonton seleced him.
--
Central Scouting loves him: “Adam is one of the best skater’s in this year’s draft -- he has excellent speed and mobility. He also has patient puck handling abilities and can surprise an opponent with a solid hit. His size and skating ability make him comparable with Tampa Bay Lightning defenseman Victor Hedman.”
--
The director of European scouting for Central loves him: “Larsson played a big role on Skelleftea, which went as high as to the Swedish playoff Finals, so in a way, he’s ready, yes. He could play here (in 2011-12). I think what he wants really is having a big role when he comes over, so it’s perhaps better for him to stay one more year at home. It’s always in the individual. Some say it’s good to come over, others say it’s not good.”
--

I think he may spend another year in Sweden, depending on his drafting team. My guess is that he won't go beyond New Jersey at #4, and would bet that RNH, Larsson, Landeskog and Couturier are all off the board by the time the Islanders pick at 5th overall.
--

I think there are two things that will keep the Oilers from picking Larsson at number one. First, as Bob Stauffer has been mentioning lately the track record for defensemen taken this high is not good; it takes them time to develop, their drafting team often becomes frustrated with the timeline and eventually sends them away. Call it the Chris Pronger syndrome.

Second, according to all reports next year's blueline depth at the draft is historic. Grabbing the center this season makes sense if you believe a defender can be grabbed next season at a lower draft number, as it is unlikely the Oilers will pick 1st overall three years in a row.
--

In November we heard this from an NHL scout: "I think Adam Larsson plays a safer game (than TBay's Hedman). I certainly think he has the same potential as Hedman. He's every bit as good with the puck and he might be a touch tougher. Hedman is a little bigger, but they're both unbelievably good skaters. I think I would take Larsson over Hedman if I could, based on what I've seen the last three years."

Kyle Woodlief offered this in an interview with Kirk Luedeke: "I always had Hedman as a notch above him and even frankly, Oliver Ekman-Larsson I think has more long-term upside than Adam Larsson does because of his unbelievable skating ability. I know a lot of people over in Sweden think that he has that sort of (cornerstone) potential. I think that he's going to be a really strong, solid defenseman in the NHL for a long time. But I don't know if I would ever see him as a true number one defenseman. I see him more as a number two who's going to eat a lot of minutes and be maybe a 40-45-point scorer. I don't see him being that number one guy who's going to come in and get 60-70 points and really lead a top power play. He makes a great first pass out of his own end. He plays solid, he plays physical. I'd like to see him, with his big body, to play physically a little more consistently along the walls and in front of the crease where he just kind of has a tendency to just lean on guys instead of getting aggressive with them. I think he's a legitimate 15-year NHL player and number two guy who, on a poor team, will maybe play as a number one from time to time. But I don't see him having that highest end that a Hedman or an Ekman-Larsson has."


I don't think we should be surprised if the Oilers select Adam Larsson at number one overall. As Bob McKenzie said this week, the big Swede has impressed some VIPs in the Oiler organization and he could be a huge part of the solution on defense.

75 comments:

  1. You don't think we should be surprised if the Oilers pick Larsson? I'll be shocked, flabbergasted and flummoxed if the Oilers call any name other than Ryan Nugent-Hopkins.

    I flip flop daily on who I'd like to see the Oilers draft first, but to me it seems as though the Oilers have already decided to pick Nugent-Hopkins and are just playing the game.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think RNH is number one on their board, but it isn't a slam dunk either. If another NHL team came along and offered enough for Edmonton to move down a slot or two I could see it happening.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It'l be interesting.

    I think I should track the guys I call for

    Last year was something like this:

    1. Seguin 2. Hall 3. Granlund 4. Schwartz 5. Tarasenko. 6. Skinner 7. Gormley 8. Hishon 9. Fowler 10.

    Guys I didn't like at all:
    Mcilrath, Tinordi, Etem, Nelson, Watson, Nieddereiter, Sheahan.

    2nd round was

    1. Weal 2. Petrovic 3. Rutkowski 4. Kabanov. 5. Galiev

    75/25

    ReplyDelete
  4. Edmonton would run Larsson out of town.

    Can you imagine if RNH or Couturier had a Hall/Skinner type rookie season? Larsson would be done.

    I would definitely leave him in Sweden for a year.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Traktor: It's going to be hell anyway.

    This is THE pick for this management group.

    Failure is not an option. (At least I hope)

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'd be very surprised if the Oilers called Larsson's name at #1. A) It would leave them wide open to major criticism if one of the forward prospects went nuclear B) They are probably confident they can land a workable enough D piece later in the draft, and C) If they were ever so inclined I think it's easier for them to secure a plug and play type or two via free agency at D vs C.

    I do think Huberdeau's performance at the MC has further muddled many teams top 30 lists and there are lots of reasons to suspect there could be a repeat of last years draft day surprises, i.e. the Fowler fall.

    The least likely scenario has the Oilers making a major move to turn 19, 31 and possession A into two top tens and abandoning the PR hype #1 brings them. Are they really capable enough to grab the ring when it's not so clear cut as it was last year? Don't think I'd have a major issue with Huberdeau/Couterier + Hamilton when the smoke cleared being that "we're only in year 2 of the rebuild" anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  7. FPB


    Wonder what 19, 31 + Hemsky / Gagner / Omark might land? Again, using the "year 2" escape clause.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cabbiesmacker: If we put Hemsky, I think NJ would be ready to give up on the N4.

    In this case it would make it ''safer'' to get Larsson, as you would also get Couturier/Huberdeau, to back up in case.

    Pophoman: You decide what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  9. As D day draws closer I really think the best criteria could be which prospect sports the best Astro Boy hair style. I have RNH edging out Couturier at this time based on tint only.

    Siemens imo should move up just for not going mainstream and staying with the Iggy Pop look. Bonus that you just can't go wrong with a guy that looks that much like Barry Manilow. Lorieau is getting a little long in the tooth afterall.

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftprospectdetail.htm?dpid=9465

    ReplyDelete
  10. Cabbie: You should propose fashion as a next category for the combine.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The Oilers should make the best move for the roster and pick Larsson #1, and what the pundits say and flashy pick ticket-selling be dammed.

    Then trade up into the top 10 and grab one of the top 5 centres, all of which have little to differentiate between themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Buddy sounds like the second coming of Hamrlik.

    Not a bad way to spend a #1 pick.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Does Woodleif realize that only 2 NHL dmen qualify as #1 using his criteria in each of the last 2 seasons? Or that Pronger only achieved that once in his entire career? But we seem to have a #1 dman sitting in the minors :)

    There is way more to being a #1 dman than just points. We all saw how Pronger controlled the game while he was on the ice for us that one season. Bad things rarely happened, mediocre players suddenly looked very stable. Adam Larsson appears to have been asked to play a big minute role on his SEL team at 18 and did well - his team made the finals. Points were down this year but look at any quality dman and their point totals vary a lot year over year. Injuries happen playing defense - and Larsson was hurt this year - and it effects the offense.

    If we knock Larsson for "not having Lidstrom upside" then you have to knock every forward in this draft for not having "Crosby upside". Lidstrom is a generational player. Larsson is the safest pick of the top 5 - and aside from the legitimate issues associated with taking dmen that high - you can also make the case that he's the best pick.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Let me get this right. We can use history to tell us that drafting a WHL forward isn't the wisest decision, but we can ignore the sketchy history of drafting defensemen early in the draft altogether?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Did Tampa bring Hedman over right after he was drafted?

    This draft reminds me of the Jagr draft a bit, that year there were 5 guys who separated themselves but iirc there was no real consensus #1.

    Nolan went 1 and then there was Primeau, Ricci, Nedved and Jagr I think. Not sure of the order except Jagr went fifth I believe. All were at worst useful players.

    I would think this draft will be similar. Hopefully the Oilers get Jagr

    ReplyDelete
  16. The Oilers should make the best move for the roster and pick Larsson #1, and what the pundits say and flashy pick ticket-selling be dammed.

    Then trade up into the top 10 and grab one of the top 5 centres, all of which have little to differentiate between themselves.


    I'd do that too if if I could get another top 5/6 pick. I'd shoot for Larsson and Couterier.

    I think the Oilers would go RNH, Hamilton if they pulled it off though.

    Not sure if any pick is in play until CBJ at #8 (Howson has stated as much on Stauffer's show), and the Oiler's biggest trading chip Hemsky and 1RW belongs to Nash on that team so its not a great fit (unless 83 or Nash is willing to play the off wing)

    There is the chance the Oilers trade Gilbert + 31st for Commodore + 8th, but I hope they don't. Even v3.0 has to see that 77 is one of two actual NHL Dmen on the team.

    Lou is the wild card at #4, but he's a guy who rarely gives up good value and a #4 this year is very good value. I thinlk he'd bury Rolston in order to sign Parise before trading the #4 to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think if you could get the CBUS pick then Florida's selection might be in play. Tallon likes to add bullets.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Danny - try reading my last sentence again more slowly this time - might save you some time......

    ReplyDelete
  19. Oilers have to take bpa, this idea that they will take a centre because of the glut of dmen next draft reeks of amateur hour and not picking Parise because they had too many smallish centres already.

    I have no idea who the best player is. They all have their flaws, magnified by the constant spotlight. Larssen's resume is certainly impressive though

    ReplyDelete
  20. LT,

    So if EDM get CBJ's 8th, something like 19th and 8th (plus Cogs/Brule type?) for 3rd?

    I'm not sure that's enough for 3rd.

    Doesn't Tallon only like to drop a couple of spots to add another pick? (not sure of his history, not in a spot to research it)

    What's interesting about FLA is if Grubranson told them he won't sign with them.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Interesting. Erixon could lead to a wave of prospects not willing to sign with specific clubs. Heh.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Woodguy: I'm just awful with these things, usually wait for speeds to come by and apply logic.

    I would say that the CBUS pick, #19 and a player of some quality sounds like a lot to me.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It's just a little odd to see someone rationalize the history of guys birthplace in the last 20 years as a reasoning for considering someone risky, and the following day rationalize a defenseman as the safest pick.

    The drafting record for top 3 picks on defensemen the past 20 years has been pretty bad.

    I think you pick the BPA whomever your scouts say it is. Birthplace is irrelevant unless it extends to issues such as transfer agreements or rival league contracts.

    Hopkins has a lot of red flags rooted in looking at the numbers, but he is still the overwhelming consensus #1 pick, and we must assume the scouts are well aware of the same numbers we are.

    If Larsson is indeed Hamrlik redux? no thanks. Just sign Hamrlik.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Danny: We must not assume that.

    We should only take in consideration scouts with good track records.

    I don't care if all the Minnesota scouts tell me they like RNH. They haven't drafted an NHL player since 2004. It takes nothing to be named scout. Only track record proves your worth.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Rolston is "un-bury-able". It is a 35plus contract.

    I'm making offering to the hockey gods that Lou wants to make one more run with Marty, and that Katz is willing to take 2 bad contracts, and that crazy NJ rumour is true.

    If true, the Oilers could guarentee themselves RNH and Larsson.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think #7 would've been in play if the Atlanta franchise/management team had stayed intact. They needed to make the playoffs AND they were interested in Hemsky last year by all accounts.

    Now, they probably want to make a draft splash and use the pick and there's no pressure to make the playoffs in the first year in that market.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Moose: Or is it. Maybe they WANT to make the playoffs right away. Hemsky wouldn't be such a bad idea.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Winnipeg with a new GM and coaches means that Bogosian is off the market, since the assistant coach that the had the bad relationship with will be toast.

    And Winnipeg has the wherewithall to keep all that salary on defense for awhile.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Godot,

    Can't belive I forgot that, thanks for the correction.

    Certainly changes things.

    NJD are in a "win-now" mode and an owner who wants playoffs in his shiny new building.

    Zajac is only 2 years until UFA, they have Kovy, Elias isn't getting any younger etc.

    Maybe 4 is in play? He'd make you pay for it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. FPB: I don't think it's a complete non-starter, it's just when new management comes in they bring new ideas, goals, expectations.

    Also, even though they have a lot of good young pieces already playing at the NHL level, their prospect cupboard is pretty thin.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Can we keep this from becoming another cluster fuck? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't think #4 will be in-play. I compare NJ to Boston last year. Even though they are a veteran, contending team, they lucked into a higher pick than they are ever used to (Boston via TO's pick; NJ via inexplicable suckage) and the chance to get a high end prospect in the midst of your contending "window" is too good to pass up.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Moose: Indeed. We'll have to wait and see. The thing that makes me think they might be inclined to trade it is that at that point in the season it's not going to be their pick.

    So they might be tempted to trade it off. But still wait and see.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "Certs is a candy mint. Certs is a breath mint."

    Larsson, RNH...whoever they pick 1st, I'm going to be happy with.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Judging by L.T's post I missed something. Damn.

    L.T,

    If memory recalls correctly the top 5 usually don't move, and when they do its one or two places max.

    If NJD or FLA trades 3 or 4 for less than a 5th in a draft where there is a concensus top 5 (do I have that right?), I think the price will be steep.

    ReplyDelete
  36. NJ doesn't appear to have a second (traded away) or third (forfeited for Kovy v.01).

    They also lose a first in the next three years.

    That coupled with the fact they are a "win now" team, and its real hard to figure them out.

    I think they will just stand pat.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Ducey: Forgot about the pick they'll have to forfeit. That's probably the biggest reason #4 won't be in play.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think one of the assumptions a lot of fans seem to have when talking about trades and the like is that Katz is running this to win stanley cups rather than to maximize profit (the former might help the latter, but only in certain situations). I think it is a bad assumption. If you go back to the Penner trade I think the evidence suggests they are using the rebuild talk to defend a very low payroll while still having a product to sell (hope).

    I say this because if the Oilers were trying to maximize their chances at a cup, trading for bad salaries this last year and this upcoming year is such an obvious play that even a poor GM could handle it. Since the Oil have, instead, been shedding salary (Penner), I think we can start ruling out those trades where the Oilers take NJD's bad contracts + offer some cheap ones/picks for the #4. Or other similar deals.

    And if such a trade does go down, I'll be very very happy to see it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. At this point I wouldn't be disappointed in Larsson but the to ten right now for the Oilers (IMO) should be:

    1. Couturier
    2. Larsson
    3. Nugent-Hopkins
    4. Ladeskog
    5. Huberdeau
    6. Murphy
    7. Strome
    8. Hamilton
    9. Zibanejad
    10. Siemens

    The way its going to go will be different as teams will weigh in needs as you move away from the top 8 rather than just the BPA. For the Oilers its a simple weigh the risk vs reward.

    GXL

    ReplyDelete
  40. LT and WG:

    I don't think it would cost more than 8 and 19 to move up to 3, in fact I'd be surprised if it cost that much, but it depends on the other offers and the perceived talent tiers in the draft. I not even sure that something like 3 and 63 for 8 and 19 would be all that unfair, based on past trades.

    I've looked for a link to the details of the CAR/CLB 2004 draft trade that saw CAR move up from 8th to 4th. I found one link that seemed to indicate the cost was a 2nd round pick, but it was no more specific than that.

    We do know that NYI traded 5OV for 7OV, 68OV, and a 2nd next year, and then traded 7 for 9 and 40. So NYI moved down from 5 to 9 and received 40OV, 68OV and a 2nd the next year for doing so. Are picks 40, 68, and a 2009 2nd worth as much as 19 in this draft, assuming that moving from 3 to 8 in this draft is seen as equivalent to moving from 5-9 in the 2008 draft?

    ReplyDelete
  41. I found the details to that 2004 trade, and it goes to show how variable the difference can be.

    To CAR: 4 OV
    To CLB: 8 OV + 59 OV

    http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/7098/hurricanes2004_draft_review/

    I think what these series of trades tell us is that it really depends on how anxious the trading partners are to get something done, who they like, etc.

    IF the Oilers could get the 8th overall pick, it's not inconceivable they could move 8 and 31 for 3 looking at that CLB/CAR deal. I would consider that pretty unlikely, but we don't have many draft trades to compare here, and we don't have the infomation we need to make this call, so it's just making a best guess. It's also not impossible that FLA wouldn't bite on 3 for 8, 19, 31, if there's someone they really like at 3 that they doubt would be there at 8.

    ReplyDelete
  42. As for FLA specifically, we do have a trade from last year that might tell us how they value moving down in the first round.

    to LA: 15 OV
    to FLA: 19 OV and 59 OV

    Different drafts, different range in the first round, etc

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'd certainly do #8 and #19 to get to number 3. Would you?

    ReplyDelete
  44. speeds: I have a hard time believing anyone in the top 7 would move their pick all the way down to 19. Columbus, I believe can be had at 8, but it will require some serious haggling and give something to help them win now. (Howson would have to be sold hard that Hemsky would be healthy and effective enough to make that move, I think its a reach)

    ReplyDelete
  45. Danny - here is the list for the last 5 years - but it holds going back further:

    Dmen Top 5 – last 5 years
    2010 - Erik Gudbranson
    2009 - Victor Hedman
    2008 - Drew Doughty / Zach Bogosian / Alex Pietrangelo / Luke Schenn
    2007 - Thomas Hickey / Karl Alzner
    2006 - Erik Johnson

    WHL Domestic / Western Tier 2 Forwards Top 5 – last 5 years
    2010 - Ryan Johansen
    2009 - Evander Kane / Brayden Schenn
    2008 - none
    2007 – Kyle Turris
    2006 - none

    The dman list is way stronger and the only guys who are or are likely to be elite are the dmen. Western Canada produces a lot of big tough, gritty forwards and dmen - but elite skill guys (and especially skill centers) are rare. So if you want power forwards, gritty dmen and two way players - the WHL is great - but if you expect to find a franchise quality center then you may be waiting a long time till the next Sakic comes along - and comparing every kid who shows a bit of skill to that generational talent is silly.

    I could very well be very wrong about RNH - but history and the odds are on my side in a big way.

    ReplyDelete
  46. LT: I would if the player I would want is there. But getting the 8 without selling the soul is going to be a tough achievement. Its all going to depend on how much of a hardon Howson would have for Hemsky, injured and all.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I think Gilbert has some value too, but have no idea what Columbus would want.

    If Tambellini can walk out of this draft with one of the top center's and Larsson that's a great weekend no matter what happens.

    ReplyDelete
  48. You're not exhibiting a whole lot of truthiness there AO.

    Your dmen list includes every player drafted. The best one of the bunch is a softish skilled defenseman from the OHL.

    Why don't we pare down the list to swedish born defensemen? Is Hedman going to have that much better a career than Evander Kane?

    This WHL slant as an indicator of Hopkins draftability is really odd. Especially when theres other arguments that carry so much more merit than that.

    nonetheless, the past 6 years of drafting defensemen top 5 has been sketchy as heck. Using the Marleau logic to take a dman over Hopkins is quite the stretch imo.

    2004: Cam Barker (3rd)
    2005: Jack Johnson (3rd)
    2006: Erik Johnson (1st)
    2007: Thomas Hickey (4th)
    Karl Alzner (5th)
    2008: Drew Doughty (2nd)
    Zach Bogosian (3rd)
    Alex Petriangelo (4th)
    Luke Schenn (5th)
    2009: Victor Hedman (2nd)

    ReplyDelete
  49. I omitted Gudbranson as hes still playing Junior hockey.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Thanks speeds, that good stuff to chew on.

    The CAR/CBJ happened on McLean's watch right? We might need a McLean/Milbury rule when examining draft day trades. :)

    Its all going to depend on how much of a hardon Howson would have for Hemsky, injured and all.

    I think CBJ is after someone to pass the puck to 1RW Nash and a puck moving D (popular positions...)

    Let's not forget that CBJ ownership lit $25MM on fire last year and someone taking Commodore's $3.75/yr for the next two years will have some cache with Howson.

    Katz isn't afraid to spend $$. They AHL bill for players they want and don't want was huge last year.

    If you are willing to take on Commodore and give Howson a Real NHL player of the type he wants, I think the 8th will be driven to your door.

    Godot,

    think one of the assumptions a lot of fans seem to have when talking about trades and the like is that Katz is running this to win stanley cups rather than to maximize profit (the former might help the latter, but only in certain situations). I think it is a bad assumption. If you go back to the Penner trade I think the evidence suggests they are using the rebuild talk to defend a very low payroll while still having a product to sell (hope).

    I disagree. Katz has shown a willingness to spend when he agrees that the money needs to be spent.

    He's building a cup team, but that's the 2016 or 2017 cup, nothing any time soon.

    That's why Hemsky and even Gilbert may be gonners for "key" kids.

    ReplyDelete
  51. just going by loose categorizations on whether a player has been a good top 5 pick(+), a questionable pick(?) or a bad pick(-), since 2004 heres how I rank them:

    2004 D: -
    2004 F: +++-

    2005 D: ?
    2005 F: ++-

    2006 D: ?
    2006 F: ?+++

    2007 D: -+
    2007 F: +?-

    2008 D: +-+?
    2008 F: +

    2009 D: +
    2009 F: +++?

    2010 D: ?
    2010 F: ++??

    Good: D(4/11) F(15/23)
    Bad: D(3/11) F(3/23)
    ???: D(4/11) F(5/23)

    ReplyDelete
  52. under the range of bad <-> questionable, in terms of top 5 picks for dmen are 7/11, whereas forwards are 8/23. That's a large discrepancy.

    disclaimer: I tried to be as fair as possible in my player/pick evaluations. Some may disagree with an individuals grade, and may be right. I think all of the grades are in order of drafting if you wish to disagree on any of them.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Danny - you didn't say Swedish dmen - just dmen - so that's what I gave you. My first post on this thread stated clearly that I'm perfectly aware of the issues related to drafting dmen high. Even with that - Larsson is a better bet than Mr Projection - but I'd take an established big center like Carter over both in a second if trading the #1 would get him.

    ReplyDelete
  54. AO:

    This WHL stance is pretty insane.

    In fact, a similar stance is why LA took Kopitar, the second best player in his draft, at 11th OV.

    There's a lot of reasons to question RNH, but the fact he played in the WHL (much like Sakic, Getzlaf, Marleau, Iginla...)

    There's simply not nearly enough of a sample size that you can say with ANY authority that you can't take RNH high because not enough high end WHL picks have turned out.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Danny

    You not just call Drew Doughty a soft skilled OHL Dman .... Did you? He was one of the genuine stars on the Canadian Olympic team
    At 20 and will play on 3 or 4 more Olympic teams

    I kinda side with WG. At 20 fact Hedman played 22+ minutes a game in ECF. That is an exceptional building block.

    Agree with you that place talented fwd comes not determinative

    ReplyDelete
  56. AO, just sayin you're the one thats being rather outspoken on the subject, and if you want to get into historical percentages as your reasoning, then you're choosing the wrong side by a landslide margin.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Even with that - Larsson is a better bet than Mr Projection

    You say as a fact.

    The overwhelming consensus disagrees.

    ReplyDelete
  58. TOJ: ?

    Read AOs previous comment and you'll understand why I described doughty like that. He's not a big mean WHL guy. Doughty is the best dman inn the league when he's interested and in shape IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Danny

    Reading blackberry as daughter drives in from lake. Asked who is Danny calling. Skilled and soft? Doughty? Couldn't be..... He will be the best we have at Sochi at 24


    If we could get J Carter and keep our # 1 that would be a very very good June

    ReplyDelete
  60. Couturier still remains the safest pick of them all.

    I'd go for him and D-men. Larsson or Hamilton.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Doughty was the best we had at Vancouver.

    ReplyDelete
  62. If Larsson showed some ability to deliver offense, he'd be number 1 on my list.

    Fact is - he wasn't good enough to take charge on the first PP unit, and despite mentions of his stretch pass (circa Ladislav Smid) his EV offense was negligible.

    I maintain he's most likely going to turn into a Mattias Ohlund. Possibly a Robyn Regehr type.

    Not something I'd want at first overall.

    ReplyDelete
  63. PJO - Larsson's ability to deliver offense against men is less suspect than RNH's ability to score goals against boys. At least Larsson has delivered in a healthy season in the SEL. He was hurt this year - how much that affect him is unclear - but quality dmen point totals are very up and down because they get nicked plenty. I'm not really a huge Larsson fan - just seems that many people create a negative case against Larsson as a reason to justify picking RNH - rather than making a positive case for RNH as a #1 which is difficult. Coutourier may be the best fit on the Oil - but I doubt he want to play in EDM given his total silence on that topic (as far as I know).

    BPA? - Larsson
    Best Fit? - Coutourier
    Wants to be in EDM - RNH

    ....point #3 may win the day.

    ReplyDelete
  64. AO:

    So I take it you would have let Kopitar go so you could take Pouliot from the safe league?

    ReplyDelete
  65. As far as going to Edmonton goes...

    I want no part of any of those kids if they don't want to be the #1 OV pick at the NHL draft.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Asia: As far as Couturier's silence goes, it's probably because nobody has asked him. As he's slipped down the rankings the likelihood of him being 1st OV has disappeared. I have a hard time believing any 17yo kid wouldn't say "It would be an honor..."

    Larsson and RNH have both been asked the question point blank because they are the most likely to be picked.

    I think the days of mommy and daddy Lindros are gone.

    ReplyDelete
  67. PDO:

    What? How exactly did you come up with that? If a player makes a case for himself those secondary things don't come into play.

    ReplyDelete
  68. PJO - Larsson's ability to deliver offense against men is less suspect than RNH's ability to score goals against boys. At least Larsson has delivered in a healthy season in the SEL. He was hurt this year - how much that affect him is unclear - but quality dmen point totals are very up and down because they get nicked plenty.

    I don't agree with you here. RNH did show ability to score against boys, drove the bus on his team, and is one of the younger guys in the draft (April 1993 birthday).

    Larsson's offensive numbers have never been great. 1 goal in 54 games this year, 4 in 60 last year. Not great assist totals either, which I suspect mostly come from playing alot of minutes.

    Larsson's offensive upside has been questioned by many, including Stu MacGregor.

    ReplyDelete
  69. PJO: A great deal of Swede defensemen don't make their pro club at that age. His 1st season was qualifying him as generational talent. Now he dropped a bit but he's still ahead of guys who are qualified to have more ''offence''. (Rundblad, Erixon, Ekman-Larsson)

    Lidstrom had 2 points in his draft year.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Just some food for thought.. but if defensemen take so long to develop (which I agree, they generally do), do we really want to put it off another year?

    I am on the fence who I want the Oil to pick, btw.. just throwing it out there.

    Although I think we can have a good d-man drafted with that second pick too, potentially.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Racki:

    I agree, the Oilers would be able to draft a good D-man at 18 - but not an impact D-man.

    If we're following the Blackhawks blueprint for rebuilding from the draft, we haven't gotten our Duncan Keith yet. Larsson would fit the bill nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  72. If Oilers pick Larsson #1 , I think they will be more motivated to move up in the draft for a top 8 player

    ReplyDelete