Tage Thompson's Upside? What Do You Think?

[bob_sauve28]

Tage has been looking good. What do you think his upside is? 

[Gatorman0519]

I think realistically we can hope for a 20 to 25 goal scorer. If we could get that it would be a very good thing. 

[Doohicksie]

Average?  In what deployment?  1C?  3C?  I think he's probably not capable of fulltime 1C duty and would be considered below average there, but as a 3C or 4C will probably come in above average.

[inkman]

I don’t really like any of the selections. Too much nuance as to what his career may become. As @The Ghost of Yuri indicated, the better question is what will he become. A 1 C, 2 C, 3 C, top six winger. Just too much unknown at this point. I am excited that Donnie is giving him full exposure at the C position. Let him spread his wings and see what happens. 

[dudacek]

Sample size, but by the eyeball test he is a legit 2-way play driver right now and has been every game.

Right now he is a walking advertisement for the benefits of size. He’s making good decisions, playing with authority and using that frame to beat guys on both sides of the puck.

Not making any predictions, but when you flush a roster like we have, you hope and expect that some players will step up, fill the gaps and become more than they were. That’s been Thompson and Asplund.

Interesting to see where this goes.

[Thorner]

Tough to answer because whether he is well above average or average depends on the role he's being asked to take on. 

I see him going forward, most likely, as a below average 2C and an above average third scoring line C. 

Ie - If you want to be a playoff team, he's a 3C

[Doohicksie]

19 minutes ago, dudacek said:

That’s been Thompson and Asplund.

Yes, he's gone from afterthought to key player, hasn't he?

[Thorner]

Asplund could be another, better Larsson. And I loved me some Larsson

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Tough to answer because whether he is well above average or average depends on the role he's being asked to take on. 

I see him going forward, most likely, as a below average 2C and an above average third scoring line C. 

Ie - If you want to be a playoff team, he's a 3C

How much of this is from watching him play right now, and how much is “he’s Tage Thompson”?

I know you think what we are seeing is largely a product of role and usage. But for me it’s less the numbers and more the eye test. He’s not being carried by his linemates and his not being sheltered. He’s driving play. More surprisingly on both ends of the ice.

And he has been a plus player counting stats and possession stats in a 1st line role.

Not really disagreeing with you - what you posted makes sense to me - just playing the what-if game because I really like what I’ve been seeing

[Thorner]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

How much of this is from watching him play right now, and how much is “he’s Tage Thompson”?

I know you think what we are seeing is largely a product of role and usage. But for me it’s less the numbers and more the eye test. He’s not being carried by his linemates and his not being sheltered. He’s driving play. More surprisingly on both ends of the ice.

And he has been a plus player counting stats and possession stats in a 1st line role.

Not really disagreeing with you - what you posted makes sense to me - just playing the what-if game because I really like what I’ve been seeing

It's always tough trying to sort positionally on nhl.com but he'd currently rank about, in a tie for 55th for centres for scoring right now - and that's with usage conjuring the likes of tank-girgensons for a memory. Complete with PP time. 

He's just not *that* good. He's already in the below-average 2C category for me and I can't imagine his scoring getting much better if we actually had proper, good Cs above him

Much of what stands out falls under my favourite saying: base level competence. 

In this case, base level competence for a "good" player. 

Our roster is objectively quite bad. His eye test looks pretty good, but there is, imo, definitely some relativity baked into that vision. 

[Flashsabre]

I don’t think anyone knows. Nobody had Tage as play driving two way centre coming into the season. Kid is developing by leaps and bounds.  I’m just going to enjoy the ride with him and Asplund.

[bob_sauve28]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's always tough trying to sort positionally on nhl.com but he'd currently rank about, in a tie for 55th for centres for scoring right now - and that's with usage conjuring the likes of tank-girgensons for a memory. Complete with PP time. 

He's just not *that* good. He's already in the below-average 2C category for me and I can't imagine his scoring getting much better if we actually had proper, good Cs above him

Much of what stands out falls under my favourite saying: base level competence. 

In this case, base level competence for a "good" player. 

Our roster is objectively quite bad. His eye test looks pretty good, but there is, imo, definitely some relativity baked into that vision. 

I hope that now that he is driving play he continues on his trajectory of improvement. He's getting the chances now, later he will hopefully be converting them more. 

[Thorner]

38 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

I hope that now that he is driving play he continues on his trajectory of improvement. He's getting the chances now, later he will hopefully be converting them more. 

He may! 

I wonder if people are aware a NHL player's average offensive prime is between the ages of 23-25, statistically. He's 24. He may be an outlier but the chances his production rate jumps massively is not likely IMO. 

A reasonable progression considering the specific context re: tage does make sense 

Edited November 10, 2021 by Thorny

[Weave]

I can’t even begin to think about what his upside might be when it is clear as mud what his eventual role is going to be.

It “feels” like center is a temporary gig while the kids stew in Roc, but he seems to have taken some shine to it.

Is he a Keith Primeau?

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Weave said:

I can’t even begin to think about what his upside might be when it is clear as mud what his eventual role is going to be.

It “feels” like center is a temporary gig while the kids stew in Roc, but he seems to have taken some shine to it.

Is he a Keith Primeau?

no

[Doohicksie]

16 minutes ago, Thorny said:

He may be an outlier but the chances his production rate jumps massively is not likely IMO. 

I think the "outlier driver" is his move from wing, where he never really hit his stride, back to center which he played when he was younger and seems to be growing into the NHL level.  On a better roster where he was playing 3C or possibly even 2C under a dominant 1C like Jack was for us in 2019-20, he might be doing better due to line matchups.

[Doohicksie]

8 minutes ago, Weave said:

It “feels” like center is a temporary gig while the kids stew in Roc, but he seems to have taken some shine to it.

To me it "feels" like he's returned home to his natural position and of course he would take a shine to that.  I think he will play center most of the time moving forward.  He's the odd case that plays better as a center than as a wing.

In that position it gives a lot of flexibility to Donny Meatballs to experiment with the other centers and center prospects to see who's better at center and who's better at wing, and whether there are good line combos with two centers (apparently Cozens and Krebs were linemates at World Juniors).

[bob_sauve28]

23 minutes ago, Thorny said:

He may! 

I wonder if people are aware a NHL player's average offensive prime is between the ages of 23-25, statistically. He's 24. He may be an outlier but the chances his production rate jumps massively is not likely IMO. 

A reasonable progression considering the specific progression re: tage does make sense 

I'll take your word for it, but I had thought 27-28 was the prime years. Perhaps that's how it use to be...League getting younger all the time 

[bunomatic]

If he could hit the net that would be good. He’s improved his game and does seem to fit at centre but like others have said on a good team lower in the pecking order.

[Drag0nDan]

I like that he's shooting more.  Him and Asplund seem to have some solid chemistry - and if he can continue to improve defensively you have space to put skinner or oloffson on that wing and not have them be bogged down in the zone. 

I don't think he'll ever be some elite center, but assuming the top 6 will eventually (hopefully...) contain players like Tuch Krebs Cozens Mitts Quinn and Peterka (in addition to other players further down the pipe), i think that line makes for a solid middle 6 group that can contribute secondary scoring and take some d-zone draws.  Then Girgensons and other's (Bjork maybe Pekar or another younger forward, but this type of line tends to be easy to fill with affordable free agents) can play that energy 4th line, and take d-zone draws.  

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, Weave said:

I can’t even begin to think about what his upside might be when it is clear as mud what his eventual role is going to be.

It “feels” like center is a temporary gig while the kids stew in Roc, but he seems to have taken some shine to it.

Is he a Keith Primeau?

The way he's playing right now reminds me of Jeff Carter a bit, but I don't really want to go there.

How about Adam Creighton? Similar size and development curve, although Tage is a much better skater.

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=1157

 

[Doohicksie]

12 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

I like that he's shooting more.  Him and Asplund seem to have some solid chemistry -

I also think Skinner is getting better chances playing on Tage's wing.

[bob_sauve28]

3 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

I also think Skinner is getting better chances playing on Tage's wing.

I think Tage would benefit by having a better passing winger than Skinner there. Not sure if its fair or not, but I view Skinner as a drag on others players production. He's been passing better lately, but a play maker he is not. 

[inkman]

2 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

I think Tage would benefit by having a better passing winger than Skinner there. Not sure if its fair or not, but I view Skinner as a drag on others players production. He's been passing better lately, but a play maker he is not. 

As we saw with Jack and Evander, not all players mesh well on the ice no matter the skill level. Tage could use a great passer and a mucker on his wings.  Are those players on the roster? Idk, Asplund is enoug of a mucker and a good enough passer to work effectively with Tage.  Olofsson wasn’t bad in that spot.  

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

I think Tage would benefit by having a better passing winger than Skinner there. Not sure if its fair or not, but I view Skinner as a drag on others players production. He's been passing better lately, but a play maker he is not. 

I thought the Washington game was pure Skinner.

There were moments when he was pinballing around, creating havoc and manufacturing offence out of chaos.

And there were moments when Thompson and Asplund were creating more conventional offence and the play completely died because Skinner wasn't where he was supposed to be, or flubbed the puck when they moved it to him.

I would be so frustrated having him as a linemate.