Prospect Info: #4 Prospect Runoff

[Empoleon8771]

Clang (20%), Zohorna (21.4%) and Legare (24.7%) were all close for #4, so we're going to have a run-off with those 3 to determine 4. This poll will only be used to determine #4.

Click to read more...

 

[Empoleon8771]

Based on the early voting, it seems like this one will be super close

Bringing in a post from the other thread in here, I'm curious for the case people would make for Zohorna here. I think either Clang or Legare here would make sense, I have Clang based on his inane natural athleticism/ability plus him dominating a men's league at age 19, but I can also see someone rationalize Legare based on him having legit upside as a Neal/Hornqvist mixture type of top-6 winger. But Zohorna? I just don't see that same level of upside with him.

He's definitely the safest prospect in this entire poll, but I'm not really sure I see more than bottom-6 upside with him. He just doesn't have any obviously stand-out traits to me beyond his size. I saw someone compare him to Viktor Stalberg on here and I think that's a very good comparison. That's a good player, but is that a better prospect than Clang or Legare? I just don't see it. I kinda have similar thoughts on O'Connor to what I said about Zohorna as well. They both seem like moderately safe bottom-6 upside prospects, but does them being safer make them better prospects than riskier prospects with higher upsides?

 

[Peat]

Stay Zohorny my friends.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Bringing this in from the other thread just because I made the post in here too.

That's one hell of a stand out trait when you're not really missing any other NHL attacking skill sets imo. There will be goals he scores and sets up through protecting the puck that'd be a lot harder for anyone without his size. If he has what it takes to be trusted with minutes, I think his ceiling could end up fairly high.

This is true, but this also basically describes Eric Fehr in the NHL too. Fehr was a really solid player (although he was a dud here), so I definitely see the viability for valuing Zohorna as a prospect if you think he can be a Fehr type of bottom-6 forward. I'm just not sure I'd rank that over Clang or Legare considering their upsides.

I'd probably have Zohorna after Legare, Clang and maybe Blomqvist tbh

 

[Andy99]

I don’t get why Clang is head and shoulders above Blomqvist….I wouldn’t single him out between the two…they’re both in the top ten of our prospect pool and I’d actually put Blomqvist ahead of him based on what I’m reading/hearing….

 

[Peat]

Bringing this in from the other thread just because I made the post in here too.



This is true, but this also basically describes Eric Fehr in the NHL too. Fehr was a really solid player (although he was a dud here), so I definitely see the viability for valuing Zohorna as a prospect if you think he can be a Fehr type of bottom-6 forward. I'm just not sure I'd rank that over Clang or Legare considering their upsides.

I'd probably have Zohorna after Legare, Clang and maybe Blomqvist tbh

I never saw Fehr's salad days, but if Zohorna reaches his - or Bjugstad - p/60s, with a side of useful PP presence, then yeah, I see a useful middle six forward. Which might seem ambitious given how late he's reaching the NHL, but I feel like Blueger's a good comparable given the ages when both were lighting up the AHL. If he can parlay that size into playing with a bit of an edge as well, being a guy whose wingspan and speed makes him a defensively useful guy who can cause dangerous turnovers, then he has complimentary top six potential imo. As high a potential as Legare or the goalies? Maybe not, but high enough I'm happy to take him over the other guys given the higher levels of certainty.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don’t get why Clang is head and shoulders above Blomqvist….I wouldn’t single him out between the two…they’re both in the top ten of our prospect pool and I’d actually put Blomqvist ahead of him based on what I’m reading/hearing….

Clang dominated on a bad team last year while Blomqvist was just good on a good team, while both were playing in about the equivalent leagues for their countries. I think the Swedish 2nd league is a bit better than the Finnish 2nd league, but it's not enough to squabble over it.

Let's just put it this way. Clang had a .919 save% last year in 32 regular season games and a .952 save% in a 5 game relegation series (that they won pretty much solely because of him). Look at the stats of the rest of the team, it's downright heinous. Blomqvist was good last year, but he wasn't nearly as good as Clang was last year.

 

[Andy99]

Clang dominated on a bad team last year while Blomqvist was just good on a good team, while both were playing in about the equivalent leagues for their countries. I think the Swedish 2nd league is a bit better than the Finnish 2nd league, but it's not enough to squabble over it.

Let's just put it this way. Clang had a .919 save% last year in 32 regular season games and a .952 save% in a 5 game relegation series (that they won pretty much solely because of him). Look at the stats of the rest of the team, it's downright heinous. Blomqvist was good last year, but he wasn't nearly as good as Clang was last year.

yeah but there’s a lot more to assessing goalie play than that…I’m no expert but the assessments I’ve read about them have Blomqvist projecting as a better NHL player…dunno

 

[dogthateats]

My meaningless rationale for voting for Zohorna is that he has already scored some really nice goals at the NHL level and is huge and, so far, less vanilla than DOC and Angello (very small sample size). That being said, he doesn’t strike me as more than a good 4th liner and I do think some of our other prospects have higher ceilings (Clang, Puustinen, Broz), but I didn’t vote for them yet bc they are far away from the NHL

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Clang dominated on a bad team last year while Blomqvist was just good on a good team, while both were playing in about the equivalent leagues for their countries. I think the Swedish 2nd league is a bit better than the Finnish 2nd league, but it's not enough to squabble over it.

Let's just put it this way. Clang had a .919 save% last year in 32 regular season games and a .952 save% in a 5 game relegation series (that they won pretty much solely because of him). Look at the stats of the rest of the team, it's downright heinous. Blomqvist was good last year, but he wasn't nearly as good as Clang was last year.

Both were 5th in SV% in their respective leagues.

Clang had the better year for sure as I think the Allsvenkan is better than the Mestis and his sample size was larger, but I don’t think it’s clear cut between he and Blomqvist in terms of prospects. More of a 1a and 1b.

And I voted for Clang in this run off

 

[SEALBound]

Close again. Whoever gets the most votes wins #4...but that should make 5 and 6 go quick.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Both were 5th in SV% in their respective leagues.

Clang had the better year for sure as I think the Allsvenkan is better than the Mestis and his sample size was larger, but I don’t think it’s clear cut between he and Blomqvist in terms of prospects. More of a 1a and 1b.

And I voted for Clang in this run off

Yeah but Clang did that on a team that would have been relegated without him and had the other goalie with a .863 save%, while Blomqvist was on an IIRC good team with a backup that only had slightly worse numbers.

I think Clang putting up the 5th best save% in the league on a horrendously bad team should count as "dominating". I definitely think Blomqvist had a good year, but Clang doing what he did last year is clearly a tier above that just because of how bad his team was.

I think Clang and Blomqvist should be very close to each other, though. If Legare goes #4 here, I'd say that Clang and Blomqvist should be #5 and #6.

 

[Peat]

yeah but there’s a lot more to assessing goalie play than that…I’m no expert but the assessments I’ve read about them have Blomqvist projecting as a better NHL player…dunno

You're not wrong, but I'm curious to see what the updated profiles this summer read like, because that was a stonking season by Clang and some people have got to be rethinking things a little. Also, even at the time, I thought some of the profiles made out Clang to have an equally high ceiling, just less polish and certainty. I'm going through one of the draft guides (hockeyprospect.com) I brought last year, and the guy has Clang as a NR despite being very complimentary about his size and athleticism, because he tries to do too much. Blomqvist was his second highest goalie prospect due to how good his technique and reading of the game is, but didn't give the sense of him being the same athlete Clang is.

I'm looking at Pronman's profiles - had Blomqvist 60 spots higher than Clang, loved his speed and reading and calm, but raised doubts about his size (Blomqvist this is). He wasn't sure how Clang's skillset would work with the higher pace of the men's game and called that a big test.

That said, I'm mostly inclined to agree that I don't think Clang should be considered head and shoulders above Blomqvist. I suspect that he is here is more a tic of voting in groups than where they rank on individual lists.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Yeah but Clang did that on a team that would have been relegated without him and had the other goalie with a .863 save%, while Blomqvist was on an IIRC good team with a backup that only had slightly worse numbers.

I think Clang putting up the 5th best save% in the league on a horrendously bad team should count as "dominating". I definitely think Blomqvist had a good year, but Clang doing what he did last year is clearly a tier above that just because of how bad his team was.

I agree he had the better year but goalies are so inconsistent year to year and Blomqvist was regarded highly pre draft— believe some scouts had him above Askarov— and then had a good year on top of it. He is incredibly dominant within his age group in Finland. Also just had a very strong WJSS according to one source although I think Clang put up decent numbers there too.

I’d just move Clang up a little to be with him. Don’t think one is really above the other at this point. Both are quality goalie prospects.

 

[Gurglesons]

Clang. Simply because he has the most goalie sounding name ever.

“Chitty chitty clang clang, it’s off the glove and off the post and not in!!!!”

 

[Peat]

I agree he had the better year but goalies are so inconsistent year to year and Blomqvist was regarded highly pre draft— believe some scouts had him above Askarov— and then had a good year on top of it. He is incredibly dominant within his age group in Finland. Also just had a very strong WJSS according to one source although I think Clang put up decent numbers there too.

I’d just move Clang up a little to be with him. Don’t think one is really above the other at this point. Both are quality goalie prospects.

A lot of prospects are. I may have been too high on Poulin after his fantastic year (or at least his readiness, my opinion on his ceiling/floor has barely budged since we drafted him). I was definitely too high on Bellerive and Almeida after their great years. I'm definitely trying to be slower to get excited on wonder years. Which I think goes with Clang.

 

[Dangles78]

None of these 3 are in my top-5 but I have Legare at #7 so I'll vote him

 

[Gallatin]

X

 

[Gallatin]

Yeah but Clang did that on a team that would have been relegated without him and had the other goalie with a .863 save%, while Blomqvist was on an IIRC good team with a backup that only had slightly worse numbers.

I think Clang putting up the 5th best save% in the league on a horrendously bad team should count as "dominating". I definitely think Blomqvist had a good year, but Clang doing what he did last year is clearly a tier above that just because of how bad his team was.

I think Clang and Blomqvist should be very close to each other, though. If Legare goes #4 here, I'd say that Clang and Blomqvist should be #5 and #6.

After I saw Zohorna score two highlight reel goals in the AHL I went looking around - and the dude can shoot. At least the last 2 years he can.

He sure does pass the eye test for me. Of course - I've always bought into the idea that longer guys take longer to develop.

 

[Empoleon8771]

After I saw Zohorna score two highlight reel goals in the AHL I went looking around - and the dude can shoot. At least the last 2 years he can.

He sure does pass the eye test for me. Of course - I've always bought into the idea that longer guys take longer to develop.

Yeah I think this is fair, and why I think the Fehr comparison for Zohorna is a pretty appropriate one.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Gonna need a runoff for the runoff

 

[Gurglesons]

If Zohorna turns into prime Eric Fehr, we'd be rolling in our bottom six next year when Malkin is healthy.

 

[SEALBound]

With the drafting of Clang and Blomqvist and then the recent signing of Lindberg...we actually have a decent goalie prospect pool. One that we could cautiously be optimistic about! God damn! Amazing what one/two off seasons can do.

Ideally, between those three, at least one becomes a starter.

 

[SEALBound]

If Zohorna turns into prime Eric Fehr, we'd be rolling in our bottom six next year when Malkin is healthy.

I would be stoked if that's what he turned into. He needs to get some nastiness to his game to go with that frame. I don't think he will carve out a career as a gentle giant.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Clang. Simply because he has the most goalie sounding name ever.

“Chitty chitty clang clang, it’s off the glove and off the post and not in!!!!”

I gotta Legare, but....