Prospect Info: Annual Devils Prospect Rankings #3

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

The thing is Quenneville still safely slots as a third line center or wing. Boucher doesn't have that floor at all.

Josefson getting an opportunity to play a top six role is not that same as him realistically slotting there. Boucher will definitely get an opportunity to play a top six role but if he doesn't fit there, where does he go?

JQ does not safely slot in at third line forward. The idea that being defensively responsible and a safe player in juniors means you can do that in the NHL is a huge misnomer.

Take a look at most third liners in the NHL and how they produced in juniors. From our own squad: Bernier, Tootoo, Ruutu (scored almost a PPG in a men's league at 19 age).

 

[devilsblood]

I don't know where Boucher slots in right now, but on a team that seems willing to hand Josefson a 2nd line role, I think Boucher should be allright for now as far as role goes.

If Boucher gets to game 100 and still is struggling, I'll admit he's probably a lost cause. But not after 34 NHL games from ages 20 to 21 on the fourth line.

What's amusing to me is that people value JQ, who has had a disappointing junior career thus far, ahead of a player who has actually produced professionally. Being able to produce in the AHL is a massive hurdle, and Boucher conquered it at 20. The odds that JQ will be a top nine NHL player are much lower than Boucher right now.

But the question is not, is Boucher a lost cause. the question is who is the better prospect.

And you are right that Q did not have an impressive post draft season. But some of that was due to a concussion, some of that is due to playing on some lower lines. And that does not factor in a strong playoffs.

It also does not consider that like Matteau, Q is bigger(not quite as big but still bigger) and brings more intangibles to the table(supposedly but you know we really haven't seen much of these guys first hand). I'd prob guess that he is a better skater then boucher too.

Im not sure who I put ahead of whom here, but it's not crazy imo to go Q.

 

[Zippy316]

JQ does not safely slot in at third line forward. The idea that being defensively responsible and a safe player in juniors means you can do that in the NHL is a huge misnomer.

Take a look at most third liners in the NHL and how they produced in juniors. From our own squad: Bernier, Tootoo, Ruutu (scored almost a PPG in a men's league at 19 age).

Those are juniors 10 years ago.

Comparing junior leagues in the early 2000s is like comparing AHL last year to the AHL when Madden was putting up 70+ points.

Quenneville has a lot higher of a floor then Boucher has.

 

[devilsblood]

This is the Truth.

People seeing 15 goal this season as a negative are not taking into consideration the league and the team...Albany like NJ, was one of the lowest scoring teams in the league on top of all that.

I so dislike the idea of, the team didn't score thus it's not the individuals fault for not producing. If Boucher netted 25 instead of 15, then the team climbs the ladder of overall goals scored.

Much like the Zajac situation, when you expect a guy to produce, and then that player does not, it only follows that the teams production will suffer.

 

[JimEIV]

Those are juniors 10 years ago.

Comparing junior leagues in the early 2000s is like comparing AHL last year to the AHL when Madden was putting up 70+ points.

Quenneville has a lot higher of a floor then Boucher has.

Madden was putting up 90+ AHL points He is still the single season Albany record holder I believe.


EDIT:
1998-99 Albany River Rats AHL 75 38 60 98 44 +24

 

[devilsblood]

Wait JJ is being handed a 2nd line role? Has this been confirmed?

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Those are juniors 10 years ago.

Comparing junior leagues in the early 2000s is like comparing AHL last year to the AHL when Madden was putting up 70+ points.

Quenneville has a lot higher of a floor then Boucher has.

Bernier was #1 on his team in scoring in his draft year. By 20 points. Tootoo was #1 on his team in scoring in his post draft year. This isn't about inflated point totals. These players were, adjusted for age and era, very good scorers in juniors.

Quenneville was 10th on his team in scoring last year. That's not good. He was passed on the depth chart guys like Bukarts and Duke. Some of the better Brandon players won't be there next year, so hopefully JQ takes hold of the opportunity.

You cannot simply look at a player's skillset in juniors and make a 1 for 1 analogy to their future NHL skillset. You need a lot of skill to play on a third line in the NHL. That's why so many third liners were great scorers in junior. Very seldom do average scorers in juniors carve out NHL careers.

John Madden was a dominant collegiate and AHL scorer. Madden was third in the AHL in scoring in 98-99. You're only supporting my point.

 

[JimEIV]

I so dislike the idea of, the team didn't score thus it's not the individuals fault for not producing. If Boucher netted 25 instead of 15, then the team climbs the ladder of overall goals scored.

Much like the Zajac situation, when you expect a guy to produce, and then that player does not, it only follows that the teams production will suffer.

If Boucher netted 25 he would've been a top 20 goal scorer in the league....People are googly eyed over Kirby Rychel, he just scored 12 in 51 games(same pace) and he was a middle first rounder pick.

 

[devilsblood]

If Boucher netted 25 he would've been a top 20 goal scorer in the league....People are googly eyed over Kirby Rychel, he just scored 12 in 51 games(same pace) and he was a middle first rounder pick.

yeah, and he would prob be our 2nd ranked prospect. But he didn't so he isn't. IMO anyways. Are you now arguing that he is the #3 prospect?

Edit. Rychel also had 21 assists, compared to Boucher's 15, in 10 less games. He's more then a year younger. He's also over 6' and over 200 lb's.

So while I was not one going googly for Rychel, I can certainly see why he is a more thought of prospect.

 

[Zippy316]

Bernier was #1 on his team in scoring in his draft year. By 20 points. Tootoo was #1 on his team in scoring in his post draft year. This isn't about inflated point totals. These players were, adjusted for age and era, very good scorers in juniors.

Quenneville was 10th on his team in scoring last year. That's not good. He was passed on the depth chart guys like Bukarts and Duke. Some of the better Brandon players won't be there next year, so hopefully JQ takes hold of the opportunity.

You cannot simply look at a player's skillset in juniors and make a 1 for 1 analogy to their future NHL skillset. You need a lot of skill to play on a third line in the NHL. That's why so many third liners were great scorers in junior. Very seldom do average scorers in juniors carve out NHL careers.

John Madden was a dominant collegiate and AHL scorer. Madden was third in the AHL in scoring in 98-99. You're only supporting my point.

If Quenneville is such a bad prospect then why was he invited to Canada's development camp?

I'm sorry I just don't see Boucher being an effective player at the NHL level because his role is limited

 

[Unknown Caller]

If Quenneville is such a bad prospect then why was he invited to Canada's development camp?

I'm sorry I just don't see Boucher being an effective player at the NHL level because his role is limited

I would be concerned if a first round pick was never invited to a World Junior camp. Means very little to me.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

yeah, and he would prob be our 2nd ranked prospect. But he didn't so he isn't. IMO anyways. Are you now arguing that he is the #3 prospect?

Edit. Rychel also had 21 assists, compared to Boucher's 15, in 10 less games. He's more then a year younger. He's also over 6' and over 200 lb's.

So while I was not one going googly for Rychel, I can certainly see why he is a more thought of prospect.

Why not just compare Rychel's rookie year to Boucher's rookie year to take age out of the equation?

Rychel - 51gp, 12g, 21a, 33p, 132sog, 9.1sh%
Boucher - 56gp, 22g, 16a, 38p, 146sog, 15.1sh%

Say Boucher got a bit lucky and Rychel got a bit unlucky. Give Boucher a 13% shooting percentage and Rychel an 11% and their numbers look like:

Rychel - 51gp, 15g, 21a, 36p
Boucher - 56gp, 19g, 16a, 35p

I take Boucher's. But they're probably pretty comparable as far as prospects go. Boucher is slighted a bit because his follow-up season wasn't as good, but as I stated before he actually increased his shot totals.

 

[Zippy316]

Why not just compare Rychel's rookie year to Boucher's rookie year to take age out of the equation?

Rychel - 51gp, 12g, 21a, 33p, 132sog, 9.1sh%
Boucher - 56gp, 22g, 16a, 38p, 146sog, 15.1sh%

Say Boucher got a bit lucky and Rychel got a bit unlucky. Give Boucher a 13% shooting percentage and Rychel an 11% and their numbers look like:

Rychel - 51gp, 15g, 21a, 36p
Boucher - 56gp, 19g, 16a, 35p

I take Boucher's. But they're probably pretty comparable as far as prospects go. Boucher is slighted a bit because his follow-up season wasn't as good, but as I stated before he actually increased his shot totals.

The difference is Rychel is a power forward whose NHL role isn't solely a top six player like Boucher's is.

 

[tr83]

Boosh for all the reasons I stated in the other thread.

Not many players, even in the NHL, have his kind of shot. He was passable in his short stints with the big team. He's just learning the other areas of the game and probably learning how to train like a pro.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

The difference is Rychel is a power forward whose NHL role isn't solely a top six player like Boucher's is.

You guys 100% overrate the notion of "he can slot into the bottom six at worst, so he's more valuable."

There isn't much surplus value to having a homegrown bottom six player. Looking at some of the contracts handed out today, I could get Mark Letestu for a paltry $1.8MM per year. Erik Condra for $1.25MM. Stalberg for $1.1MM.

Having a guy with "a high floor" is nice in theory, and you would of course prefer to have home grown guys rather than free agents, but the reality is that most bottom sixers in the NHL are dime a dozen and can be replaced pretty easily. Not much real value is added to having a guy whose floor is on the third or fourth line. And to key you in, Rychel's floor is not the fourth line. It's not making the NHL. Just because a player has a big body doesn't mean they're NHL caliber. Look at the Colton Gillies', Kyle Beach's and Tyler Biggs' of the world.

Hell, look at the contributions we got from Bernier and Tootoo last year. One was signed for peanuts and the other invited to camp.

 

[Missionhockey]

You guys 100% overrate the notion of "he can slot into the bottom six at worst, so he's more valuable."

There isn't much surplus value to having a homegrown bottom six player. Looking at some of the contracts handed out today, I could get Mark Letestu for a paltry $1.8MM per year. Erik Condra for $1.25MM. Stalberg for $1.1MM.

Having a guy with "a high floor" is nice in theory, and you would of course prefer to have home grown guys rather than free agents, but the reality is that most bottom sixers in the NHL are dime a dozen and can be replaced pretty easily. Not much real value is added to having a guy whose floor is on the third or fourth line. And to key you in, Rychel's floor is not the fourth line. It's not making the NHL. Just because a player has a big body doesn't mean they're NHL caliber. Look at the Colton Gillies', Kyle Beach's and Tyler Biggs' of the world.

Hell, look at the contributions we got from Bernier and Tootoo last year. One was signed for peanuts and the other invited to camp.

My counter point to that is that quality top 9 players aren't often made available. Zubrus is a guy I wouldn't have really considered a top 6 forward in his prime but he was very valuable and played a lot of hard minutes. Pandolfo is another guy that couldn't be replaced easily at his height. That's why I rate Matteau highly, a 40 point mean son of a ***** that can skate actually aren't that common and I wouldn't call him a "true" top six forward.

Depth is very important in the NHL. It's why Pittsburgh struggles and Boston did well for many years, because around playoff time match ups are everything.

 

[Comparison Ford]

I went with Boucher here. Add Pietella or however you say it.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

My counter point to that is that quality top 9 players aren't often made available. Zubrus is a guy I wouldn't have really considered a top 6 forward in his prime but he was very valuable and played a lot of hard minutes. Pandolfo is another guy that couldn't be replaced easily at his height. That's why I rate Matteau highly, a 40 point mean son of a ***** that can skate actually aren't that common and I wouldn't call him a "true" top six forward.

Depth is very important in the NHL. It's why Pittsburgh struggles and Boston did well for many years, because around playoff time match ups are everything.

Zubrus was a 2nd line player. His even strength scoring rates with NJ were consistently above 1.40 ESP/60 on poor offensive teams. On a very good team he's a third line player.

There's nothing yet in Matteau's profile that says he's a 40 point player in the NHL. His scoring rates in juniors and the AHL project for something less than that. Now he might improve and be a guy that adapts to the NHL game well, but penciling him for 40 points is being generous at this point. If he's ever as good as Zubrus I will be surprised.

Top six players aren't made available often. However, you can get third line guys pretty easily via trade and free agency. I again point to the NJ Devils of the last several years - Bernier, Ponikarovsky, Carter. All guys we got for very little. Some other guys that were signed for $2.0MM or less last season - Brian Boyle, Dominic Moore, Steve Downie.

Let me put it this way - if you have a good core of young top six players, it should be fairly easily to backstop them with trade and free agency adds in the bottom six. However, if you have a good core of bottom six players, it is impossible to simply add a handful of top six guys via trade and free agency without severely mortgaging your future talent and cap space.

 

[Missionhockey]

Zubrus was a 2nd line player. His even strength scoring rates with NJ were consistently above 1.40 ESP/60 on poor offensive teams. On a very good team he's a third line player.

There's nothing yet in Matteau's profile that says he's a 40 point player in the NHL. His scoring rates in juniors and the AHL project for something less than that. Now he might improve and be a guy that adapts to the NHL game well, but penciling him for 40 points is being generous at this point. If he's ever as good as Zubrus I will be surprised.

Top six players aren't made available often. However, you can get third line guys pretty easily via trade and free agency. I again point to the NJ Devils of the last several years - Bernier, Ponikarovsky, Carter. All guys we got for very little.

Let me put it this way - if you have a good core of young top six players, it should be fairly easily to backstop them with trade and free agency adds in the bottom six. However, if you have a good core of bottom six players, it is impossible to simply add a handful of top six guys via trade and free agency without severely mortgaging your future talent and cap space.

Two out of these three guys are fourth liners. We saw how CBGB fared when they were elevated to 3rd line status, they were playing in roles that were above their head and they struggled. Also, a lot of these guys, like Ponikarovsky, fizzle out after a year or so because they can't sustain a high level of play.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

At this stage, Matteau could very well end up an Aaron Voros or Tuomas Pihlman. There are a lot more Aaron Voros' than Dainius Zubrus'.

People tend to fall in love with size and physicality and thus think that any player with those credentials automatically projects as a bottom six NHL player, but it doesn't work that way. You need a lot of skill to be a third line player in the NHL.

 

[Missionhockey]

At this stage, Matteau could very well end up an Aaron Voros or Tuomas Pihlman. There are a lot more Aaron Voros' than Dainius Zubrus'.

People tend to fall in love with size and physicality and thus think that any player with those credentials automatically projects as a bottom six NHL player, but it doesn't work that way. You need a lot of skill to be a third line player in the NHL.

Yeah that's possible, but Matteau does score at almost .5 ppg in a league that's tough to score goals in.

And in skills, Matteau has pretty good speed and the type of nastiness that you want out of your bottom 6. I'd bank on him being a full time player this season and will probably get pushed up the depth chart, once we hit injuries.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Two out of these three guys are fourth liners. We saw how CBGB fared when they were elevated to 3rd line status, they were playing in roles that were above their head and they struggled. Also, a lot of these guys, like Ponikarovsky, fizzle out after a year or so because they can't sustain a high level of play.

Right, but you captured the essence of bottom six players in the NHL - they fizzle and are inconsistent from year to year.

How many truly consistent third line players are there? How many stay with the same team for more than three or four years when they're UFA age?

Take a look at Chicago. Their bottom sixers have evolved from each cup win. And the guys like Kruger will be gone when they hit UFA. The winning model in the NHL is to have young and talented top sixers with a good defense. The bottom six rolls.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Yeah that's possible, but Matteau does score at almost .5 ppg in a league that's tough to score goals in.

And in skills, Matteau has pretty good speed and the type of nastiness that you want out of your bottom 6. I'd bank on him being a full time player this season and will probably get pushed up the depth chart, once we hit injuries.

I like Matteau as a prospect. I just value the potential 20 to 25-goal player we have in Boucher over the likely third line player we have in Matteau, even if Boucher's bust odds are higher.

 

[JimEIV]

4th liners are a dime a dozen, 3rd liners really aren't.

 

[Hockey Sports Fan]

Kind of a tough choice, but I'll give Quenneville the benefit of the doubt this one time. Honestly I don't know how any of Quenneville, Matteau, or Boucher get slotted below Santini, but I guess I just don't see a lot of upside with Steve.

Add Pietila!