2010-11 Canes Country Exit Analysis: Drayson Bowman

by Bob Wage on Aug 11, 2011 9:01 AM EDT in 2010-11 Exit Analysis

Carolina Hurricanes forward Drayson Bowman (file photo by Jamie Kellner)

Carolina Hurricanes forward Drayson Bowman was another young player who had a chance to gain some valuable experience last season. After making the team right out of training camp and playing in the first eight games of the season, he was then reassigned to Charlotte where he spent the majority of the rest of the season.

But late in the season, Checkers coach Jeff Daniels gave Bowman a vote of confidence and the youngster was recalled by the Canes and played in the final 15 games of the year.

Bowman was a scoring machine in junior and had two straight 40 plus goal seasons while racking up a total of 165 points in 128 games during his last two seasons with Spokane. He has yet to find that scoring touch in the NHL though and did not light the lamp in his 23 games last season.

The rookie averaged 9:48 of ice time per game and spent 46% of that time matched up in a line combo with Brandon Sutter and Chad LaRose. He also finished with 24 hits and eight blocked shots.

	GP	G	A	P	+/-	PIM	PPG	SHG	GWG	GTG	SOG	PCT
2010 - Drayson Bowman	23	0	1	1	0	12	0	0	0		28	0

The Good:

The coaching staff showed a lot of confidence in Bowman by playing him so much on the third line with Sutter and LaRose. He did not disappoint in his own end and had a respectable plus/minus for a rookie, especially considering he had so few points. He developed his physical game as the season went on and did some damage on the forecheck late in the year. While he did not show up on the scoresheet often, he did exhibit some flashes of a quick release shot and you can see that the scoring potential is there.

The Bad:

While the youngster played well in his own end and pretty much did whatever was asked of him as he primarily played on the team's checking line, he will eventually need to score some goals or show some ability to set up plays if he wants to make it in the big league. The next season will be an important one as the coaching staff will be looking for him to take the next step in his development.

The Money:

The 2007 third round draft pick is in the final year of his entry level, two-way contract which will pay him $650,000 if he plays in the NHL this coming season. He will be a restricted free agent next year.

How do you think he played last year?

Poll

How would you grade Drayson Bowman's performance last season?

A

4 votes

B

68 votes

C

159 votes

D

27 votes

F

4 votes

incomplete

13 votes

275 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 29 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I wanted to give him an incomplete, but I guess he played more than I thought.
That said, he really did everything that was asked of him. Hard to argue against that.
Wish he could get more top-six flying time.

by Caniac1026 on Aug 11, 2011 9:28 AM EDT reply actions

Dissappointed

The previous rap on Bowman in the AHL was lack of consistency and effort game to game and shift to shift. I was surprised he was called up and stayed up since he is one of our prospects that I consider still needing to stay in the AHL and refine/hone his game.

Bowman, unlike Dalpe and Boychuck, never developed as a consistent scoring threat in the AHL, and he never seemde to get comfortable or find the consistent scoring touch he demonstrated in juniors and in spurts in the AHL. Though he looked better defensively, it seems a waste of his talent not to give him the opportunity to stay in the AHL next year—hopefully with Boychuck and Dalpe gone, and give him a chance to gain his offensive flair every game and debvelop the confidence, work ethic and consistency to make it to the NHL later.

This is another guy that I wonder is suffereing from Paul Muarice Prospectitus—if you can’t play defense first I don’t want you—so that’s what Bowman worked on and let his offense sit on a shelf.

It’ll be interesting to see where he falls out next year.

by Squeaky83 on Aug 11, 2011 9:31 AM EDT reply actions

B

I agree with Squeaky…….could it be a coaching issue. He has the skills and is a hard worker but is just missing the mark. I think he will start the season in Charlotte and make an impact right away………he will see some action in the NHL, but for another team…… He will become trade bait……….

by littlepig on Aug 11, 2011 9:58 AM EDT reply actions

Bowman = B+

I agree that Bowman didn’t find his scoring touch; but in watching him at the NHL level, he was excellent defensively on the third line. I had seen projections of him as a third line, two way wing even though he was a scorer in Juniors. I know the Hurricanes organization was and is high on him; and particularly his shot which is definitely NHL quality. Bowman and Boychuk battled each other through their careers and now they are battling again to see which one will make the Canes roster. I suppose I disagree with some people here at Canes Country in that I think the Hurricanes will exercise patience with Boychuk, Bowman, Nash, and Terry and won’t rush to unload any of them except for a deal too good to turn down.

by abramsdoug on Aug 11, 2011 10:40 AM EDT reply actions

he needs to find a role and a way to consistently fit it, if that’s in a checking role then fine, just because he was a scorer in junior doesn’t mean that’s going to translate to the NHL, remember Dave Schultz was a scorer in junior. Apples & Oranges obviously, but whether your a scorer, checker, energy guy, enforcer doesn’t matter.

by Go_Shelf on Aug 11, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions

AD, question for you? For the last 6 or 7 Exit Analysis; you have voted either B+ to A+. I’m not sure how you voted on the previous ones. But if almost every player was an A or B, then shouldn’t that indicate that we should have at least been in the playoffs or been one of the top teams in the East? I understand some players had good years; but if the majority of them were performing so well, should the results reflect that?

And Bowman did play pretty well defensively, but 1 point in 23 games. I just can’t understand given him a B+.

Here's the SKINNy, the All-STAAL game was CAMtastic!

by PackPride17 on Aug 11, 2011 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions

This was one of my points in grading Staal a “C” in an earlier analysis. I think the fact that we did not make the playoffs has to enter into individual grades, and the superstars/team leaders need to shoulder a heavier portion of that burden.

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 11, 2011 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions

which still makes zero sense, nothing better than a “C” for Bowman’s makes sense.

by Go_Shelf on Aug 11, 2011 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions

But a large part of the burden has to belong to coaching and system. Not saying it’s the coaches fault, but you can have some of the best guys on the team and if they all don’t fit within the system you aren’t going to get the results you expect.

by Brandon Blue on Aug 11, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions

you can point to a slew of reasons why a performance is at a certain level, but in the end it is what it is. for me, a “C” means you’ve met expectations; “B” is risen above expectations; “A” is excelled way beyond what was expected; and “D” is performed below expectations.

With those in mind, I truly feel Bowman performed below expectations w/the ’Canes last season, for whatever reason.

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 11, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions

All our grades are subjective. You can be a Superfan and give everyone wearing the Sightless Eye an A+ because they’re your team. You can be the opposite and give them all F’s. AD’s grades are his opinion, and just as valuable as anyone’s. Packpride, you’ve been on this site a while and are a part of this community. Questioning someone’s grades seem a little beneath you.

I gave Bowman a C, for disclosure.

by Gillimus on Aug 11, 2011 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but I feel my question to AD is valid. If everybody performed at an A level; wouldn’t the team’s overall record reflect such good individual performances by everyone? It was just a question of trying to figure out his criteria for grading.

Here's the SKINNy, the All-STAAL game was CAMtastic!

by PackPride17 on Aug 11, 2011 10:08 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

It sounded to me like it wasn’t his grades being questioned, it was his criteria, which is a legit question IMHO…I’m curious as to the criteria as well; if where the team finished (i.e. out of the playoffs) is NOT a piece of the puzzle, then I get why his grades were all A’s and B’s, which I would interpret how they performed compared to the rest of the players on the team, not necessarily how their performance was graded compared to the rest of the league or tied into how the team did w/regard to making the playoffs.

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 12, 2011 8:04 AM EDT up reply actions

I gave Bowman a “B” because he for the large part did exactly what was asked of him in the role Maurice and the coaches gave him. The Hurricanes failed to make the playoffs because at the start of the year the defense was porous; and because certain players were miscast and over-slotted. The Hurricanes at the end of the year were a solid team; and but for a home loss to Columbus and/or a loss to Toronto (in no small part because Tim Brent paid a heavy price and sacrificed his body on a 5 on 3) were in the playoffs. If the Hurricanes had two more points, the grading for some of the players would be far more generous. One the coaches re-united Skinner/Ruutu/Jokinen the Hurricanes had a line that was very hard to stop. The Staal/Cole duo was quite good at the end of the season. Bowman/Sutter did fine work as a checking line duo. I made the grades by watching the performance of the players both at the time and then afterwards via Center Ice Vault, rather than judging them via preconceived notions.

by abramsdoug on Aug 12, 2011 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions

Wish I could have given him an A

….but it didn’t work out that way. What really caught my eye is that in the last 3 or 4 games he got some top line time…and was very, very good. He didn’t light the lamp, but made some great passes…and was gripping the stick too tightly. But I clearly remember Drayson’s hustle, energy, and especially skating skill in the zone as well as getting the puck out of his own zone…he’s young, had a case of the nerves occasionally. That said, I expect he will surprise again this year and demonstrate that he’s more than just potential. I like his game a shade better than Boychuk’s (which isn’t a rap on Zach) and feel he has, perhaps, the best shot of any of our prospects, Dalpe included.

by NotOpie on Aug 11, 2011 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions

D

Bowman was all the talk coming out of camp, but he didn’t force his way into the lineup and stick. If he’d made an impact on the NHL level throughout the season instead of just at the end, he’d be in the C/B category. That is, if we’re grading players on their time with the ’Canes and not the Checkers.

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 11, 2011 12:26 PM EDT reply actions

that may be fair, 3 pts in 32 NHL games for a guy that is touted as an offensive player.

by Go_Shelf on Aug 11, 2011 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions

And 28 SOG in 23 Games isn’t showing a propensity to try and score either…that could be coaching, or that could be a player without offensive confidence to shoot, or a player who can’t create his own shot opportunities—none of which are good indicators.

Right now if it’s between Bowman or Tlusty—I’ll take Tlusty.

by Squeaky83 on Aug 11, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

I get what you’re saying but they haven’t created an award for the player with the most SOG yet, so until those SOG turn into points he hasn’t been successful at why he’s here.

by Go_Shelf on Aug 11, 2011 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions

You might have missed my point—I agree with you. I’m saying an offensive player finds a way to get off shots, i.e. shots on goal. If you are not getting off at least a shot a game as an offensive guy, what are you doing?? Are your attempts not making it through the defense? Are you not shooting becuase you lack confidence? Are you unable to shoot because you can’t create space? Are you shooting but missing the net so you’re not accurate or effective? None of these are good indicators from the players perspective that he’s demonstrating offensive capability—in other words, I’m expressing other indicators beyond just “not scoring”.

Sometimes young kids come up and show some offensive flash, but haven’t figured out NHL goalies, then you can say he’ll find a way to score. Didn;t see much of that from Bowman. Then again, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, he could light up the SOG, and Mo would just bench him if he wasn’t considered “defensively responsible” and willing to be physical. So did he tone down any offensive instincts to meet his coaches desires in an efort to even get playing time and stay in the NHL??? Is this maybe a reason why Tlusty hasn’t further developed the offensive flair he first showed?

I dunno, but overall I thought Bowman, for a supposed good offensive weapon, didn’t l ive up to billing in that area.

by Squeaky83 on Aug 12, 2011 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions

In my mind the issue is the situations that he was put into. He was initially put on the 4th line and asked to prove himself as a 4th liner…with almost no offensive opportunity. He did so and truly acquitted himself quite well. Then it was on to the 3rd line, still predominately a checking role…he adjusted, saw more minutes per game, and was even an asset in the defensive zone. Then finally he was given his natural, offensive role in the last few games. His hustle and effort were evident from the start…and yes he was nervous because he had all the pressure in the world to perform…three different roles in a very short time….and he did well in each. The only missing piece was that he didn’t score….my feeling is that now that he has had the experience, that will come.

by NotOpie on Aug 12, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Incomplete

Yes, he got in more games than I thought. But I’d wager it was all lower line time. His +/- was a Zero so he took his defense seriously. Not a bad thing on a Maurice team. 28 SOG in 23 games on lower lines is pretty fair.
I kinda feel that evaluating fuzz-faced kids on limited lower-line ice-time for their Offensive abilities is a summertime farce. No disrespect intended.

by drifterscape on Aug 11, 2011 2:04 PM EDT reply actions

more to come…Tlusty and Samson on deck. Summer will be over eventually.

Editing Manager of Canes Country.com

by Bob Wage on Aug 11, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions

ahhh, teasing us about Mo's coming analysis, I see how it is

;-)

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 11, 2011 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I gave Bowman ...

a solid “C” as and after watching him play like he did the last 2 years in Spokane…I feel that he has been overwhelmed but has in several ways redeemed himself but having quality play on that " checking line"..he does need to go back to what he did and knows best and that is to find the back of the net on a regular and consistant basis…this year will prove beyond any doubt if he is or ever will be a NHL caliber player on a consistant basis…i give the kid a B+ for his effrots for heart and efforts in the last of the season..but over all and even in Charllotte ..a solid “C” …Thanks Bob

What did you do during the summer when the playoffs are over ?
Go Canes & Checkers !!

by CaniacSteve on Aug 11, 2011 2:44 PM EDT reply actions

Bowman

I have to give a C. I was hoping we could’ve seen more of him and Boychuk last season. This season him and Boychuk have to play themselves on the team. If they do poorly in training camp, I’m looking for JR to put both of them in a packaged trade.
If only had JR had stick to his guns about the youth movement and had him and Boychuk up here playing more I guess we could see how good of players they could really be. Maybe we can see that this season. Hard to say.
The NHL network is going to show on Aug.18th at noon game 7 of Stanley Cup final between Edm. and Car. and after that game 7 between sabres and Canes ECF.

by skinnerthewinner on Aug 11, 2011 4:21 PM EDT reply actions

We DID have a youth movement!

We went from the oldest team in the league to one of the youngest.

Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.

Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!

by MichaelProcton on Aug 12, 2011 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions

that's a misnomer

following the team all year long, you know we had kids in Charlotte who, if management was truly committed to testing at the NHL level, would have been moved up much, much earlier in the season and for longer stretches than just at the end of the season. There would have been no need for the failed Stillman reboot and Rosie on the first line, etc. By the END of the season, yes, we were younger, but not throughout the year, i.e. any youth movement was very late and very limited.

Of Maurice, Karmanos said: "I’m happy Paul is back but he’s going to be judged the same way as any other coach. We need to win more consistently."

by Sergeant Stinky on Aug 12, 2011 8:06 AM EDT up reply actions

No, it's not.

If a team goes from old to young, that is, by definition, a youth movement. Plenty of those kids got their chance, but they simply didn’t produce. For a team that was in a playoff race (and very nearly made it), they didn’t have time for the Bowmans and Samsons and Boychucks to dick around. They needed production. And that “failed Stillman reboot” provided just that. He was one of our best per-game scorers in points and assists.

Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.

Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!

by MichaelProcton on Aug 12, 2011 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions