Player Discussion Evan Bouchard

[foshizzle]

FFS.
You cant even have a honest discussion.

Just to hard to admit that you were wrong...eh?

Hahaha what? You’re not having an honest discussion. You posted two opinion pieces that align with your opinion and said see.

Fact is- as a young defensemen his zone denials and zone exits were excellent. When he got more mins his zone denials and zone exits remain excellent. Now- with a complimentary partner- his zone denials, zone exits, are elite. It’s the progression of a good player.

An honest discussion would be “he’s an excellent defensemen” and his Partnership has been great with Ekholm- not Bouchard was developed by Ekholm and will be suspect away from him. Jesus. If you want to have a discussion on what his future is based on what he has done- sure. You seem to think he’s going to fall off a cliff without Ekholm

 

[guymez]

@foshizzle

Also...still waiting for your 'numbers' to refute what I posted above. That Boucard was a 3rd pairing dman playing just over 17 min TOI before Eckholm got here.

 

[guymez]

Hahaha what? You’re not having an honest discussion. You posted two opinion pieces that align with your opinion and said see.

Fact is- as a young defensemen his zone denials and zone exits were excellent. When he got more mins his zone denials and zone exits remain excellent. Now- with a complimentary partner- his zone denials, zone exits, are elite. It’s the progression of a good player.

An honest discussion would be “he’s an excellent defensemen” and his Partnership has been great with Ekholm- not Bouchard was developed by Ekholm and will be suspect away from him. Jesus. If you want to have a discussion on what his future is based on what he has done- sure. You seem to think he’s going to fall off a cliff without Ekholm

Do you know what the word mentor means?
It means to provide influence, guidance and direction.
That means helping to develop Bouchard who was far from a finished product before Ekholm got here.
Thats as honest as it gets so you can try to split hairs if you want.

Its becoming pretty clear...as soon as you get backed into a corner rather than admit you were wrong you try and weasel your way out by any means possible.
That is not at all honest.
It is juvenille though.

 

[foshizzle]

@foshizzle

Also...still waiting for your 'numbers' to refute what I posted above. That Boucard was a 3rd pairing dman playing just over 17 min TOI before Eckholm got here.

I never disputed that. You love making strawman arguments holy shit. Him playing 3rd pair didn’t mean he should be playing 3rd pair. He was the best on the team for zone denials and exits.

Your logic- Ekholm landed and he instantly became a number 1 dman. Instant. Or maybe, just maybe- he was always that player that just needed opportunity?

I wonder why they dont put Ekholm with Ceci and turn him into another Bouchard. After that- put him with VD. You’d have 3 Bouchard’s!! You know- because it’s Ekholm that develops defencemen

Mentorship and developing are two different things. Developing includes coaching.

You call me a weasel. Okay- I will admit I’m wrong. Please post Ekholm’s underlying metrics and QoC the 5 years prior to landing in Edmonton. Post his same metrics his time in Edmonton. Do the same for Bouchard. If you can honestly demonstrate that one had benefitted the other more (Ekholm) I’ll say you are right. If both have had their numbers go up- then my argument of them helping each other is right. Is that fair?

Also- was Ekholm playing top pair in Nashville when he was traded here since you mentioned Bouchard was playing 17mins a night.

 

[guymez]

I never disputed that. You love making strawman arguments holy shit. Him playing 3rd pair didn’t mean he should be playing 3rd pair. He was the best on the team for zone denials and exits.

Your logic- Ekholm landed and he instantly became a number 1 dman. Instant. Or maybe, just maybe- he was always that player that just needed opportunity?

I wonder why they dont put Ekholm with Ceci and turn him into another Bouchard. After that- put him with VD. You’d have 3 Bouchard’s!! You know- because it’s Ekholm that develops defencemen

Wrong.
Never said that. Never insinuated that.
More bullshit from you.

The fact is Bouchard was a 3rd pairing dman playing just over 17 min TOI before Eckholm got here.
That is a fact.
The quality of comp was low prior to Ekholms arrival.
Do you dispute that? Of course you dont.

Ekholm helped Bouchard grow as a dman over the past year. Taking on more and more tough minutes to the point where they are (now) the primary first pairing.
It was a process and it began with Ekholms arrival.

Seeing as you need to be told things over and over again I will repeat what I said regarding Bouchard...

IMO he was a young dman with elite offensive instincts and holes in his defensive game.

As I have been saying all along...a solid high quality vet presence in Ekholm helped Bouchard solidify and elevate his overall game.
Its truly perplexing why you find this so difficult to accept.

 

[Aerchon]

Bouchard is meeting or exceeding an extremely high draft pedigree. Anyone without bias knew Bouchard was an extremely special prospect carrying his team in junior in a way similar to what Draisaitl was doing. Both, for those who followed them, extremely likely to succeed at the NHL level.

Ekholm helping him reach his potential is of course true.

Ekholm being the primary reason for Bouchard’s development is pure bias conjecture. If anyone is even implying this, they are fooling themselves and denying reality. At best Ekholm sped up Bouchard’s development rather than created it.

Anyone denying how much Bouchard has helped Ekholm is fooling themselves.

Anyone denying how amazing Bouchard has been this year in his own right is just stupid.

For clarification. I am not directing this at anyone.

Just stating facts.

 

[VainGretzky]

There is Bouchard 3rd in scoring even though he has played fewer games than anyone behind him not on the Oilers a healthy +6 but someone thinks he needs to step up well my thoughts