Date of Birth: Feb. 13, 2005
Age: 18
Height: 6’2
Weight: 196lbs
Position: Defense
Shoots: Right
Team: Soo Greyhounds (OHL)
Overview
Ranked #77 by ELITEPROSPECTS.COM
Ranked #106 by FCHOCKEY
Ranked #74 by DAILY FACEOFF
Ranked #51 by TSN/BOB McKENZIE
Ranked #59 by MCKEEN’S HOCKEY
Ranked #59 by TSN/CRAIG BUTTON
Ranked #31 by NHL CENTRAL SCOUTING (NA Skaters)
Ranked #90 by DRAFT PROSPECTS HOCKEY
Ranked #93 by SMAHT SCOUTING
As you can see, Andrew Gibson is rated exactly where Dallas will be picking. Despite profiling like a shutdown defenseman, he was second in scoring on his team last year in the Northern Ontario Junior league. His draft year didn’t see the offense translate, but some believe it’s there — the Greyhounds missed the playoffs this year with an unimpressive roster and leaky goaltending — which might be why he was the Soo Greyhounds’ rookie of the year. It’s also probably why he was eventually selected to represent Canada at the U18s.
What’s odd is that Gibson didn’t play in the OHL last year. And he missed a big chunk of this year due to a kidney laceration. Needless to say, Gibson has been a quiet riser because of circumstances, which will make a team like Dallas wonder if he’s simply scratching the proverbial surface. A steady shutdown defender with offensive upside. We’ve heard this description before. Good omen? Let’s find out.
Need-O-Meter
Gibson is exactly what the Stars wish they could sign for next year’s Cup run: a big, smooth-skating right shot defensemen that can slot in next to Miro Heiskanen, or Thomas Harley. He plays a steady game without lacking the soft skills to strengthen the team’s movement breaking out of the zone.
I’m gonna pick on Esa Lindell for a second. First let just say that Lindell is a quality defenseman who is positionally intelligent, and plays within himself. No matter how much I complain about a team paying their “Methot” more than their “Karlsson”, he’s a very savvy player with a lot of skills upatairs — as in, his ability to anticipate, and read plays is something he does at the highest levels against top competition. But…he can’t make a pass. He can’t skate out of trouble. He can’t retrieve pucks for quick exits. Because of his poor puck handling, he can’t survey the ice to give himself options to get out clean. So he’s good defensively thanks to strong gap control and general positioning. But I wouldn’t describe him as “good in the defensive zone” no matter how many dimestore analysts tell you otherwise. (Think about this description in reverse. How often do you hear people describe a forward as “good in the offensive zone” and leave it at that? Probably never. Instead they point out identifying traits, like playmaking, forechecking, shooting, their ability on the rush versus on the cycle etc.)
Gibson, conversely, is good in the defensive zone. Since the words “smooth-skating” don’t actually help us, it helps to know exactly what part of his skating excels. Gibson’s skating comes alive with his stops and starts. His acceleration is first-rate, which allows him to shake forecheckers when he’s defending, or evade them when he’s trying to push play. Beyond just quick-twitch speed, he’s quite agile, able to pivot, cut back, and reassess. He makes good use of crossovers, which is key for changeups, and moving quickly in different directions. (Nathan MacKinnon is arguably the best at this.)
You’d be hard pressed to think of many quality defensemen in the modern era who can’t skate. That’s because speed is becoming one of the more dominant factors in the defensive zone. Players need to get in and get out. Forechecks are too fast, and while it’s easy to slow the game down with board rims and dump outs, it doesn’t help teams maintain possession to switch from defending to attacking. Someone like Gibson who can actually make strong defensive zone plays is exactly what the Stars need.
This video by Recrutes does a good job of capturing some of his broad strengths and specific weaknesses.
BPA-O-Meter
The issue with Gibson is whether or not he’s a strong territorial player. Gibson doesn’t have great vision in the defensive zone, and even when he’s able to make plays breaking out of the zone, he doesn’t facilitate the rush the way you’d think. As long as hockey becomes increasingly about players who can make plays in all three zones, there will be a premium on players with skills in all three. Instead of droning on and on about my personal opinions, let me put it this way: Gibson has the talent to play in all three zones. But does he have the talent to control all three zones?
Thing is: I don’t believe that’s the real issue. The real issue is about what else is available. Gibson might not even be the best shutdown d-man at #61. What if Hunter Brzustewicz is still on board? A defensemen with every bit the defensive prowess as Gibson, but stronger in transition with a lot more spatial awareness. What about Beau Akey? A defender with a very unique ability to shutdown the rush, but who also has a cannon for a shot. Brzustewicz and Akey are smaller, but I would argue they’re more assertive when it comes to controlling all three zones. And that’s not even getting into whether or not potential impact forwards like Andrew Cristall or Gracyn Sawchyn fall to 61.
Is this unfair to Gibson? You bet. But that’s the reality of the draft. You don’t get credit for taking the guy you wanted; you get credit for taking the guy who makes the biggest impact. If I decide to order a taco from Taco Bell instead of a place with better ingredients, do I declare the taco from Taco Bell the better taco just because that’s the taco I chose?
Gibson will be judged by whether or he was the best player at his rank. Picking safe players is a risk in and of itself, and that’s what makes Gibson a risk: he has a high floor, but a low ceiling.
Here’s a great thread on him by Brock Otten from McKeens that undercuts the criticism of Gibson’s offense.
Good pick — Bad Pick?
So far I’m guessing he probably sounds a lot like Bichsel to a lot of people, but if you read my report on Bichsel, you know Bichsel’s game is a lot more nuanced. I don’t really see that nuance (or as much nuance, I should say) with Gibson. The most attractive part about Gibson’s game is his speed and agility. In that way, he has more in common with a player like Stephen Johns: a solid, north-south defenseman who was big and fast, but not all that multidimensional.
While I personally think Dallas should focus on left wing (if Marchment keeps trending down, left wing is gonna be brutal in two years), I think Gibson would be a good pick. I wouldn’t love it, but the fact he had such an explosive offensive season in his pre-draft year and his subsequent performance at the U18s all make a compelling case; especially when you factor in everything that worked against him this year, between the Greyhounds’ listless performance as a team, and his injury.
I feel like evaluating defensemen is still something of a blindspot in hockey analysis, so that’s the real reason I’m giving Gibson the benefit of the doubt. He has a lot of hard skills you want to see in a good shutdown defender. I also think there’s a lot of soft skills to work with in terms of transitioning the puck; something I’d argue is more critical for offense (the ability to gain territory first and foremost) than simply having a big slapshot and blindly pinching.