Prospect Info: Flames prospect rankings: #4 RUNOFF POLL!

[Bounces R Way]

Shinkaruk because he is the closest to making the NHL. Kylington will always be a prospect that requires a lot of moulding and is likely at least 2 years away. 3-5 before he starts to make significant impact if he does. Plenty of similar prospects have faded before. He might be the most talented of the bunch but careers aren't built on talent alone.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Honestly though, the pros and potential to his game vastly outweigh his holes which has been overstated.

Which is similar to what a lot of people on this board screamed when Kabanov was available to use and we picked Reinhart instead.

Lets just leave it at I'm far more cautious in my expectations of pretty much any prospect than most people seem to be, with HF being a pretty bad in that regard.

 

[SaintMorose]

Taking Shinkaruk here. With my big 3 off the board Kylington and Poirier are in the mix as well but the guy who took the biggest step forward last season was Hunter so gotta give it to him.

 

[Volica]

Between Kylington and Rasmus for me.

Attitude vs Lazy
I went with Rasmus, because I honestly think there's an NHL'er in there with some good upside. That poise up and down the ice is pretty impressive. Kylington, if he hits that ceiling... yeah, good night.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

I have to say, comparing who we have to go and my feelings on how difficult its going to be soon, and what I've seen when I was checking out the Canucks prospect poll, god damn am I happy our pool isn't as bad as theirs.

 

[Anglesmith]

First and second are sufficiently close to do a run-off vote. I'll organize the poll in a second here.

 

[Anglesmith]

Run-off poll

Alright, new poll is up.

 

[Volica]

I have to say, comparing who we have to go and my feelings on how difficult its going to be soon, and what I've seen when I was checking out the Canucks prospect poll, god damn am I happy our pool isn't as bad as theirs.

After Tkachuk, it's actually fairly comparable to be honest.
Juolevi has probably a higher floor and a decent enough ceiling that he'd be the best out of Kylington, Andersson and himself.
Demko is really comparable to Jon Gillies, Gillies looked good in the AHL; we'll have to see how Demko looks.

After that, it's pretty equal throughout. It's not like Jankowski's a better prospect than Boeser; who was a top 5 NCAA player last year. I don't think we can point and laugh about the cupboard. What we can laugh about is the NHL level youth

 

[Dertell]

Poirier had a stellar rookie season in the AHL; a better debut then Shinkaruk. Last season was tougher but the whole team was a mess of sorts. And Shinkaruk got opportunities in the top six that were never afforded to Poirier. The difference between them is negligible.

Shinkaruk's bad start to his pro career was likely more a product of his injuries than anything else and he has a better even strength scorer than Poirier's in their first two years (which is important for scoring to convert in the NHL).

 

[Rangediddy]

Alright, new poll is up.

Well when you put it like "who would you take if you could only pick one?"... ya, I think we have to go with the risky, high ceiling, smooth skating, offensive d-man over the middle six skill winger.

But right now, based on where these guys are... assuming we're not ranking on potential, but which are our top current prospects, Shinkaruk is the guy.

 

[Anglesmith]

Well when you put it like "who would you take if you could only pick one?"... ya, I think we have to go with the risky, high ceiling, smooth skating, offensive d-man over the middle six skill winger.

But right now, based on where these guys are... assuming we're not ranking on potential, but which are our top current prospects, Shinkaruk is the guy.

But that is how I would define "top prospect." It's not about who is the better player right at this moment, it's about who has the best combination of potential and reliability.

If someone offers you a bunch of different scratch cards and says you can only have one, you don't just take the one with the biggest jackpot, do you? You have to weigh the risk and reward. That's why I phrase the question that way; I think it's the only fair way to rank players against each other who may play completely different positions, have completely different development trajectories and ceilings and be destined for different roles.

Anyway, with that we're done here. On to the next one.