EHM The Blue Line

Ukko wrote:Watched it this morning, I quit after 2 periods of play because I have work to do, but it seems I've seen enough, lucky 3-0 for the Oilers and not a great display of hockey imo.

It's a bit annoying to see such talented players in mediocre teams..

Do you expect finesse tic-tac-toe play after the game was delayed because the intense sunlight melted the ice? I guess I'm not far off linking the numerous wobbling pucks to that. And the way Talbot played, I would not call it lucky.

ClassicSwarley wrote:What are everyone's thoughts on Jimmy Vesey so far this season? Is he overhyped or is he actually decent? I see he already has 3 goals..

He's playing really well actually. He's scored 3 with kind of bad puck luck. I like him a lot, he looks much better then i thought he would.

Was he overhyped? Probably, but he's still a very good player.

Season is still very young but Radulov is looking really good so far with MTL. He's playing a very good game against Philly tonight. It seems he indeed matured alot.

Radulov is really good. Glad Lehkonen gets to play on the same line.

Finally Elliot had a great game. Gave the Flames their first win. Was really great against Chicago.

Canadiens are really doing well, if they don't loose Price they'll be a real threat all season and can aim for successful playoffs imo. I like how it's clicking between the big names and newcomers (Weber, Shaw, Radu, etc )
I liked what I saw of Lehkonen too

Chicago's PK is a shame really, I can't believe they're missplaying so much !

Radulov should cut down on the penalties though. Leading in minor penalties 7 in 6 games.

Yeah that's the only con with Radulov so far.

Lekhonen is impressive for his age IMO. I really like watching him play.

philou21 wrote: Lekhonen is impressive for his age IMO. I really like watching him play.

Yes, he is impressing. What has helped him is the fact he has played on men's teams for four years already before joining Montreal. Two years each at the highest level in Finland and Sweden. It is a much better way of development than, for example, going to the Canadian major juniors. Major Junior is a better way to get drafted higher but it's proven not so good for the long-term development of European players. Of course, there are some it works for so it's not all bad.

Manimal wrote:

philou21 wrote: Lekhonen is impressive for his age IMO. I really like watching him play.

Yes, he is impressing. What has helped him is the fact he has played on men's teams for four years already before joining Montreal. Two years each at the highest level in Finland and Sweden. It is a much better way of development than, for example, going to the Canadian major juniors. Major Junior is a better way to get drafted higher but it's proven not so good for the long-term development of European players. Of course, there are some it works for so it's not all bad.

I totally agree with that. I think that most of Swedes/Finns that had hat path come to the NHL with way more maturity than other guys with more talent but less maturity.

Manimal wrote:It is a much better way of development than, for example, going to the Canadian major juniors.

Probably a reason why Matthews went to Switzerland that final year.

philou21 wrote:I think that most of Swedes/Finns that had hat path come to the NHL with way more maturity than other guys with more talent but less maturity.

I think it's important to compare apples with apples & oranges with oranges.....Lehkonen's 21 years old, not an 18 year old draftee (so shouldn't he be compared with other 21 year olds/players from the 2013 Draft) - are you thinking guys like Nathan MacKinnon, Seth Jones, Sean Monahan and Max Domi are less mature because the played in Major Junior?

Also, regarding Lehkonen, 6 games is a pretty small sample size...the NHL's a long season, especially for those that have never played more than 50 games in a season

nino33 wrote:I think it's important to compare apples with apples & oranges with oranges.....Lehkonen's 21 years old, not an 18 year old draftee (so shouldn't he be compared with other 21 year olds/players from the 2013 Draft) - are you thinking guys like Nathan MacKinnon, Seth Jones, Sean Monahan and Max Domi are less mature because the played in Major Junior?

My goal wasn't to generalize that all players who come from Major Junior are immature haha Some players are and some players aren't. I just think that playing with men seems to help some players. Also I never mentionned the age or names of other players nor compared him to anyone in particular. I only said that I think it helps in some cases. Some players at 21 are still not there mentally sometimes.

Also, regarding Lehkonen, 6 games is a pretty small sample size...the NHL's a long season, especially for those that have never played more than 50 games in a season

I think most of us already know that. We were only talking that so far it looks good! The kid has the speed to follow the vets which sometimes is hard for the rookies to keep up in their first NHL games.

Dan Bylsma needs to be fired. We're never even making the playoffs with him behind the bench

I loved that Flyers comeback in the 3rd period but I think the Flyers were the better team that night if we don't count the 2nd period and look at when Mason was in net. The Sabres were missing some key players(Eichel, Kane), is Bylsma the problem? I'm not sure firing the coach now would change much but maybe you can explain it to me better

nino33 wrote:

philou21 wrote:I think that most of Swedes/Finns that had hat path come to the NHL with way more maturity than other guys with more talent but less maturity.

I think it's important to compare apples with apples & oranges with oranges.....Lehkonen's 21 years old, not an 18 year old draftee (so shouldn't he be compared with other 21 year olds/players from the 2013 Draft) - are you thinking guys like Nathan MacKinnon, Seth Jones, Sean Monahan and Max Domi are less mature because the played in Major Junior?

I was never comparing him with someone three years younger
Those examples you mention are top picks.Lehkonen was a 2nd rounder.
Plus, I am mostly comparing him(and others) to Europeans taking the CHL route.
Better comparisons would be Marko Dano, Valentin Zykov. Nichushkin perhaps, but he took another path and his development seem hampered by not getting enough playing time.

It is impossible to claim players would be better off taking one or the other direction as you just don't know what would have been different, but we see it too often with young talented Europeans moving to the CHL and turning out lesser than guys staying home where they were seen as similar before.
Playing and practicing with men seem more beneficial to me as long as the player get enough ice time

I didn't quote you Manimal, I quoted Philou....and his point wasn't about similar players as he said "other guys with more talent"


Regarding the "Playing and practicing with men seem more beneficial to me as long as the player get enough ice time" - I think it's also probably pretty helpful that the pace of the game is slow with little physical play

nino33 wrote:I didn't quote you Manimal, I quoted Philou....and his point wasn't about similar players as he said "other guys with more talent"

Sorry if that didn't sound clear to you but by more talent I wasn't talking about top picks or 18 yo propects. I was talking about players around the age of Lekhonen all around.

Regarding the "Playing and practicing with men seem more beneficial to me as long as the player get enough ice time" - I think it's also probably pretty helpful that the pace of the game is slow with little physical play

I'm just curious there since I don't know much about EU hockey but I thought the game was a bit faster since the rinks are bigger? I'm not talking versus the NHL though but for a 17-18 year old guy playing with men it's probably faster than playing in the Major Junior no?

While I'd think an SHL/KHL team would almost always/always beat a Major Junior team, I suspect the pace of play in Major Junior is faster.

From watching the KHL and SHL (and Olympic hockey on Olympic sized rinks) what I notice is a lot of play "on the outside" and a much slower paced game in general than in North America & comparably there's not a lot of physical play or significant checking (the KHL really does remind me of ringette).


I think this is why some "skill" players from Europe/Russia don't transition well to North America because they simply don't have the time they do playing in Europe/Russia (and also why North American players can easily put themselves out of position when on Olympic sized ice...it takes some getting used to to realize you can't play as aggressively on the big ice, it's more of a passive/waiting game); that's why Olympic hockey on Olympic size ice can IMO be so boring.

I'd also say that this is less of an issue than it was in the past, as more and more top players play on both types of ice growing up & the NHL has a lot less physical play/significant checking than it did


EDIT - I didn't look long online (I'm sure there's more), but here's some support about the slower game overseas: Daniel Alfredsson saying the game on the big ice is slower (after the Vancouver Olympics) http://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/news/t ... ze-surface, a Hockey News article noting the same thing after the 2014 Olympics http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/artic ... ng-offense, and Russian parents brining their kids to the GTHL in part because of the slower game on the big ice http://www.tsn.ca/canada-s-largest-rep- ... s-1.425440

nino33 wrote:I think this is why some "skill" players from Europe/Russia don't transition well to North America because they simply don't have the time they do playing in Europe/Russia (and also why North American players can easily put themselves out of position when on Olympic sized ice...it takes some getting used to to realize you can't play as aggressively on the big ice, it's more of a passive/waiting game); that's why Olympic hockey on Olympic size ice can IMO be so boring.

Well that's true. Bigger ice, more space between players means more time to think.
It's very individual if a player can think fast enough for NA rink. That's something no one knows before they experience it.

nino33 wrote:While I'd think an SHL/KHL team would almost always/always beat a Major Junior team, I suspect the pace of play in Major Junior is faster.

Yeah, higher caliber of play doesn't always mean faster.

The AHL is very slow, skilled, and deliberate, IMO. The NHL is faster than the AHL, but in my experience the ECHL is even faster in pace than the NHL a lot of the time. In that case, the lower caliber of play actually contributes some to the speed/pace. It's a known thing though that a guy that can't skate well can often get by in the AHL, but maybe not the NHL where *everyone* can skate well. The AHL has some real good skill, but skews a bit older than the ECHL in a lot of cases. A lot of guys in ECHL are just out of juniors/college, and a Kory Karlander playing in the ECHL when he was like 40 is the *extreme* exception.

I know when teams were switching from the IHL 2.0 and C(entral)HL to the ECHL the fan reaction was generally "Wow, this is a lot faster pace" because the CHL and IHL 2.0 generally skewed more toward older players, while the ECHL is very much a young man's league.

If you want an example of what youth really means though, look at what Team North America did in the World Cup and that everyone largely had no answer for them and their skating/speed.

So there's also more to account for than ice size and sheer caliber.

Hampus Lindholm should fire his agent, he's signed now at $5.25m for 6 years, that's a super cheap deal. That rivals Tavares, Josi and Klingberg as the best contracts in the league.

Can't believe Hampus signed that, severely underpaid.

Nice deal fur the Ducks though! That's a steal. You should also consider that maybe the player accepted to get paid a little less so the Ducks could keep their core.

Oh my, what a steal for the Ducks! They must be ecstatic he signed for that kind of money!

Peter_Doherty wrote:Hampus Lindholm should fire his agent, he's signed now at $5.25m for 6 years, that's a super cheap deal. That rivals Tavares, Josi and Klingberg as the best contracts in the league.

Can't believe Hampus signed that, severely underpaid.

Hampus agent wanted a better contract than Ristolainen got. But Ducks GM said he won't pay that much.

Isn't this just the opposite of the "bad contracts" that people say GMs to often give? I'd like to see more GMs stand up to players, and let them hold out.....as I've said before, IMO "the game" is what matters and not individual players (maximizing their income); to me it's more "a steal" that hockey players are paid millions a year HaHa