Bluechippers

  • Thread starter MontrealCruiser_83*
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
craig1 said:
I disagree. Bluechip mean surefire, legit, top-end prospect. Bluechips are guys like Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Johnson, MAF, Lehtonen, etc.

Auld and Bourdon are not Bluechips.

Incorrect. It's not a matter of debate. Bluechip has always meant 'surefire NHL'er' or as close as you can get to it.
 

MontrealCruiser_83*

Guest
superroyain10 said:
Do you an x-bob define blue-chipper as sure to make the NHL or potential all-star?
Sure to make the NHL, with upside.
 

bure94

Guest
blue chip also blue-chip·per (blu-'chi(p'?r) n.

1. A stock that sells at a high price because of public confidence in its long record of steady earnings.
2. An extremely valuable asset or property.
3. Games. A blue poker chip of high value.

--

Bluechip doesn't mean NHL ready:

Bluechips are coined from the stock market. It's a stock that is highly valuable.

So really any highly valuable prospects are bluechips. Kesler is our only bluechip, with Bourdon a possibility.

Auld a blue chip, lol ! :biglaugh:
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,716
4,975
If blue-chipper is defined as very good chance of making the NHL, San Jose has tons of them. Mainly its because they draft/sign players who are going to/getting out of college, meaning the players get/got four solid years of development. It makes them safe bets to make the NHL. Also, they value players with high work ethic, which is another thing that ensures a player will make the NHL:

Michalek
Goc- Almost a guarantee he will make the team; too mature not too
Carle-Homer pick. Has shown flashes of brillance and could probably play in the AHL
Ehrhoff-At the least, as a 6/7th defenseman. Too skilled to not have an NHL home.
Clowe-Will probably make the Sharks fourth line this year, did pretty well in the AHL.
Morris-From scouting reports is very mature and polished for his young age
Murray- Trying out for SJ, already very polished according to many Baron fans
Gorges-Homer pick :yo: has excelled at ever stage of competition; has an average skillset, but superb enough work ethic to make the NHL.
Patzold-His accomplishments at such a young age hint at least NHL backup.
Ehelechener- His good work ethic should at least ensure he becomes an NHL backup. Could be the next Johan Hedberg.

Maybe:
Stafford-College seasoning + AHL production; could probably be a 6/7 on some weak teams.
 

thestonedkoala

Going Dark
Aug 27, 2004
28,169
1,600
superroyain10 said:
I don't think Harding, Burns, or Koivu will consistenty be all-stars. But O'Sullivan and Pouliot will both be very very good.

Harding, Koivu, and Burns are underrated on this board. Ever since Burns moved to defense and was picked in the top round a lot of people questioned that. But he has had a steady camp and he'll be good. All Star? No but really good? Most likely.

Koivu, I agree on but he'll also be very good. He is the type of player you build your team around. He does everything right, isn't flashly but works hard, tough, and you throw him out there to secure the lead. He's good at face offs also.

Harding is severely underrated on this board. What does the guy have to do to get some credit? He faced almost 50 shots a night when playing for his junior team, had an awesome GAA and SV% for the Aeros last year and is a very quiet prospect.
 

hockeyfan125

Registered User
Jul 10, 2004
20,017
0
craig1 said:
I disagree. Bluechip mean surefire, legit, top-end prospect. Bluechips are guys like Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Johnson, MAF, Lehtonen, etc.

Auld and Bourdon are not Bluechips.
Luc Bourdon is a blue-chip prospect. He has franchise defenseman potential.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,716
4,975
DoobieDoobieDo said:
Harding, Koivu, and Burns are underrated on this board. Ever since Burns moved to defense and was picked in the top round a lot of people questioned that. But he has had a steady camp and he'll be good. All Star? No but really good? Most likely.

Koivu, I agree on but he'll also be very good. He is the type of player you build your team around. He does everything right, isn't flashly but works hard, tough, and you throw him out there to secure the lead. He's good at face offs also.

Harding is severely underrated on this board. What does the guy have to do to get some credit? He faced almost 50 shots a night when playing for his junior team, had an awesome GAA and SV% for the Aeros last year and is a very quiet prospect.

Well, to be an all-star goalie, he would have to consistently be a top 3 goalie in the West. But I agree that Koivu and Burns are pretty underrated on this board. Offensive flair, prowess, and high stats are generally highly valued on this board
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
Blue-Chip:
Cam Ward
Jack Johnson
Andrew Ladd

The best of the rest (with NHL potential):
Danny Richmond
Justin Peters
Kevin Nastiuk
Mike Zigomanis (Does he count?)
 

PanthersRule96

Registered User
Jun 15, 2003
6,048
0
Visit site
Rostislav Olesz NO DOUBT. All you guys said he wasn't before, look at him now.
Nathan Horton for sure too.

IDK, Lukas Krajicek is underrated but probably not a bluechipper.
 

craig1

Registered User
Nov 1, 2002
4,207
0
Pittsburgh, PA
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
Incorrect. It's not a matter of debate. Bluechip has always meant 'surefire NHL'er' or as close as you can get to it.
Then we will disagree on the term "Bluechip."

By your definition, there are 400 Bluechips. By mine, there are about 60.
 

JoeLH

Registered User
Oct 15, 2003
703
4
Visit site
For sure this is not very clear, but: Greiss plays very, very good in the beginning of the current DEL-season, and he is really close to get the number one spot of Oliver Jonas with Cologne, who won the championship with Berlin last season, because Kolzig was injured - and Jonas really not showed any negative differences in compairison to Olie ...
In my personal opinion, Greiss perhaps could become the starting goalie in San Jose in a few years, and i know this means really a lot!
 

thestonedkoala

Going Dark
Aug 27, 2004
28,169
1,600
superroyain10 said:
Well, to be an all-star goalie, he would have to consistently be a top 3 goalie in the West. But I agree that Koivu and Burns are pretty underrated on this board. Offensive flair, prowess, and high stats are generally highly valued on this board

Well he was in the top 5, played more than Valiquette and Hauser...

He had a 2.01 GAA and a .930 SV%...

And that's after he had a concussion...
 

Skroob*

Guest
Jesus Christ, theres maybe 20-25 Blue chip prospects in the entire NHL, so why is everyone claiming their team has like 4 or 5???
 

Teemu

Caffeine Free Since 1919
Dec 3, 2002
28,753
5,227
MontrealCruiser_83 said:
Who on your team would you consider a bluechip prospect?

Guys who have a handful of NHL games are eligible.

Well, Ruutu if you still count him as a prospect, and Cam Barker. We have quite a few tier II prospects, though.
 

loadie

Official Beer Taster
Sponsor
Jan 1, 2003
7,833
238
New Brunswick
craig1 said:
I disagree. Bluechip mean surefire, legit, top-end prospect. Bluechips are guys like Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Johnson, MAF, Lehtonen, etc.

Auld and Bourdon are not Bluechips.

Exactly...jesus, every team would have 3-4 Blue chippers if it was someone who would make the NHL. There's 30 teams for godsakes. Not every team has a blue chipper.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,716
4,975
loadie said:
Exactly...jesus, every team would have 3-4 Blue chippers if it was someone who would make the NHL. There's 30 teams for godsakes. Not every team has a blue chipper.

Definitely. I agree with this.
 

Chaos

And the winner is...
Sep 2, 2003
7,968
18
TX
My definition of a blue chipper is a potential top line forward or defenseman, or a top notch goalie, while also being fairly safe to play in the NHL for a long time. Guys like Ovechkin, Lehtonen, Crosby, Phaneuf, Suter, etc. So for the Stars, we have none. Some very solid players, but definately no blue chippers.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
Kyle Chipchura said:
Brendan Mikkelson is far from being a bluechip prospect at the moment IMO. He has yet to establish himself as a dominant force in the WHL, so I'd hardly consider him as close to the NHL level. He has many things to work on before making it to the pros. One thing is for sure though, his skating and speed are already way above average at a young age. Many aspects for Brendan to improve on though, wether it is his decision-making or getting concrete results with the good offensive skills he possesses.

I'm more concerned about the fact that he didn't look out of place at all playing an NHL preseason game vs. the Kings, than whether or not he lights up the WHL. Any 18 yr old d-man who can play against 30 year old NHLers isn't too far from being a bluechipper.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
Skroob said:
Jesus Christ, theres maybe 20-25 Blue chip prospects in the entire NHL, so why is everyone claiming their team has like 4 or 5???

well when you have 4 first round picks in the last 3 drafts you may have 4 bluechippers...i.e. Anaheim with Getzlaf, Perry, Smid, Ryan.
 

knight44

Registered User
Jul 31, 2005
427
0
Toronto
AVS dont have all red chippers (whatever that means)

Blue Chip:
Svatos (if not injured then he can be great)
Woliski (alot of potential)
Budaj (Scouts say that he has the potential to be better the Abei)
T.J. Hensick (Alot of upside to this guy)

Not Blue chip but can be:
Richardson (great season in OHL, if he keeps it up he can play NHL in 1-2 years)
Stoa
Macias (Very fast 3rd ranked skater in draft, can play LW)
Durand
 

jmelm

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2002
13,412
3,822
Toronto, Canada
Ryan Whitney.


Could be the most underrated prospect in the entire NHL. That fact that he didn't make the HF Top 50 is totally ludicrous, especially considering he should have been in the top 15 or 20.
 

LaVal

Registered User
Dec 13, 2002
6,695
2,299
Kelowna
bure94 said:
blue chip also blue-chip·per (blu-'chi(p'?r) n.

1. A stock that sells at a high price because of public confidence in its long record of steady earnings.
2. An extremely valuable asset or property.
3. Games. A blue poker chip of high value.

--

Bluechip doesn't mean NHL ready:

Bluechips are coined from the stock market. It's a stock that is highly valuable.

So really any highly valuable prospects are bluechips. Kesler is our only bluechip, with Bourdon a possibility.

Auld a blue chip, lol ! :biglaugh:

Just like most hockey terms, the literal translation doesn't apply. In the NHL, "bluechip" has always meant a player that is almost certain to make the NHL regardless of their top end potential. It's the same reason players like Ott and Tootoo were regarded as bluechips despite their lack of top line talent.

craig1 said:
By your definition, there are 400 Bluechips. By mine, there are about 60.

By Jay's definition (which is correct) there certainly aren't 400 bluechips. Surefire is a far cry from possible or even likely. By Jay's definition, their is 1 or 2 max per team.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->