Both players are strong puck-movers with impressive offensive-instincts. During the game scouted Grigorenko played more of a perimeter game, while showing a willingness and ability to support his defensemen through the neutral, and deep into the defensive-zone. Grigorenko has 25 goals and 33 assists through 36 games with the QMJHL's Quebec Remparts this season.
Yakupov also played a perimeter game. That said, once the puck was on the young phenom's stick, he would go straight to the tough scoring areas. As a winger, Yakupov had less d-zone responsibilities. As such, he was less involved defensively; often flying the d-zone early. Yakupov is averaging more than 2 points-per-game through 26 games with Sarnia this season, as he has 21 goals to go along with 32 assists.
Grigorenko had the better overall grade thanks to his offensive-ouput of 1 goal and 1 assist. Yakupov did produce multiple offensive opportunities in the game, but did not earn any points.
OVERALL RISK/REWARD RATING
Both players were impressively involved in the play; producing over 4 events per-minute played. Grigorenko had an elite-level overall risk/reward rating of 2.75 to go along with an overall ratio of 4.17 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. His best rating was produced in the defensive-zone.
Yakupov had an overall risk/reward rating of 1.66 to go along with an overall ratio of 2.24 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. His best rating was produced in the offensive-zone.
|EVENTS/ MIN||4.34||4.48||EVENTS/ MIN|
OFFENSIVE-ZONE RISK/REWARD RATING
Despite Grigorenko producing more points, it was actually Yakupov who had the better offensive-zone risk/reward rating (1.10). His higher rating was made possible by his activity in the offensive-zone, as he was involved in an incredible 3 offensive-zone events per-minute played. He produced an offensive-zone ratio of 2.17 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He won his only offensive-zone puck-battle, while recovering 7 loose-pucks. He completed 8 of 14 o-zone pass-attempts, while successfully beating opposition players with 8 of his 12 attempted dekes. Two of his four attempted shots were on net.
Grigorenko had an offensive-zone risk/reward rating of 0.43 to go along with an o-zone ratio of 2 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He was involved in less than half as many o-zone evetts as Yakupov. He lost his only offensive-zone puck-battle, but recovered 6 loose-pucks. He completed 9 of 11 attempted passes, while successfully beating opposing players 1on1 with both his attempted dekes.
|OZ POS||26||12||OZ POS|
|OZ NEG||12||6||OZ NEG|
|EVENTS/ MIN||3.00||1.30||EVENTS/ MIN|
DEFENSIVE-ZONE RISK/REWARD RATING
Grigorenko had far-and-away the better defensive-zone risk/reward rating (1.08), while managing an incredible d-zone ratio of 4 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He also had more than twice as many d-zone events as his fellow Russian prospect. He won 2 of his 3 d-zone puck-battles, while recoving 9 loose-pucks. He also completed 5 of his 6 d-zone pass-attempts.
Yakupov had a defensive-zone risk/reward rating of 0.08, to go along with a d-zone ratio of only 1.20 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He was involved in 0.87 d-zone events per-minute of ice-time. He won only 1 of his 3 d-zone puck-battles, and completed 2 of his 4 d-zone pass-attempts.
|DZ POS||6||20||DZ POS|
|DZ NEG||5||5||DZ NEG|
|EVENTS/ MIN||0.87||1.81||EVENTS/ MIN|
NEUTRAL-ZONE RISK/REWARD RATING
Both prospects had similar neutral-zone risk/reward ratings, but Grigorenko had twice as many neutral-zone events per-minute of ice-time.
Yakupov had a neutral-zone rating of 0.32 and a neutral-zone ratio of 3 successful plays per minute of ice time. He completed 1 of his 2 neutral-zone passes, while beating an opposition player 1on1 with his only attempted deke. He also intercepted 1 Swiss pass in the neutral-zone, while successfully dumping the puck deep into the offensive-zone 3 times.
Grigorenko had a neutral zone risk/reward rating 0.36 and a neutral-zone ratio of 1.83 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He lost his only neutral-zone risk/reward rating an completed 6 of his 8 n-zone pass-attempts. He was unable to handle 2 neutral-zone passes, and dumped the puck deep into the offensive-zone on one other occassion.
|NZ POS||6||11||NZ POS|
|NZ NEG||2||6||NZ NEG|
|EV/ MIN||0.63||1.23||EV/ MIN|
SHORT-HANDED RISK/REWARD RATING
Yakupov was not used to kill any penalties, while Grigorenko had just over 1 minute of PK ice-time. He had a perfect performance short-handed; producing 5 successful plays. He intercepted 1 neutral-zone pass, recovered 2 loose-pucks in the defensive-zone, while successfully dumping the puck out of the d-zone twice.
|EVENTS/ MIN||5.00||EVENTS/ MIN|
POWERPLAY RISK/REWARD RATING
Both players were used on the powerplay. Yakupov was involved in 5.13 events per minute of powerplay ice-ime. He had a powerplay risk/reward rating of 4.27 and a PP ratio of 6 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He had 1 shot on net and completed 2 of his 3 PP pass-attempts.
Grigorenko produced 3.76 events per minute of powerplay ice-time, to go along with a PP ratio of 4 successful plays for every 1 mistake or lost puck-battle. He had 1 shot on net, recovered 1 loose-puck, and completed 2 of his 3 PP pass-attempts.
|EVENTS/ MIN||5.98||3.76||EVENTS/ MIN|