HF's Spring 2005 Organizational Rankings 1-15

[AnThGrt]

I like to see that the Kings moved closer to #1 yet i still believe that they could of been closer to #1. I do not see how the Rangers are better then them in prospects or how Edmonton is but oh well i guess the lack of good golie prospect really hurts what i want to know is if they say get Rask where there ranking would be

 

[kruezer]

Nashville should have been ahead of Montreal, IMO.

I also don't understand why the Oilers are so high. Four of their top prospects, Deslauriers, Niinimaki, Lynch, and Woywitka, (which were all listed in the top six of the HF Oilers preseason top 20 prospects) had awful or disappointing years. Most of the Oilers media roundtable have written Mihknov off and think Salmelainen is done in North America. I'd take the Kings group over them anyday, but that might just be me being a homer.

Also, about Niittymaki,
Niittymaki's 24. He turns 25 in June. He came over as a 22 year old in 2002 and just completed his third season in North America. However, according to Guy Flaming,so Niittymaki should have still been considered in the organizational rankings.

I like the Kings slighty over Edmonton on Forward and Defense, just slightly, but having JDD and DD is a huge advantage over anything the Kings have in the Nets IMO, they seem about equal.

 

[Enoch]

Philly too low
Montreal a bit too high.

Agreed...other than that.....I liked the write up and the rankings. I'm still confused as to why Montreal has managed to crack the top 5 two years in a row with such an average group of prospects.

 

[Barnaby]

I like to see that the Kings moved closer to #1 yet i still believe that they could of been closer to #1. I do not see how the Rangers are better then them in prospects or how Edmonton is but oh well i guess the lack of good golie prospect really hurts what i want to know is if they say get Rask where there ranking would be

Probably help... unless NYR or EDM net a top 5 pick...

 

[Form and Substance]

I hate when people pick on grammar, but when you are trying to burn someone else on lack of intellegence, something like this has to get laughed at.

Well at least you weren't trying to burn anyone on lack of intelligence, were you?

 

[Le Golie]

Well at least you weren't trying to burn anyone on lack of intelligence, were you?

Nope.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Vanek is the next Brendl right?Parise's jockstrap>>>>>>>>Vanek?

I'd take Parise way before I took Vanek.
Parise is going to be a better leader and a bigger scoring threat. He went toe to toe with Vanek point wise all year, and look who he was surrounded by. The Americans were a much better team than Albany, with a bigger scoring threat. Parise may not be a sniper like Vanek, but is a pure playmaker. So for anyone to assume that Vanek is better than Parise is ridiculous. Parise registered a point on 29.3% of Albany's, where Vanek had a lower percentage (although just slightly) at 28.8%. Just something for people to think about.

 

[Freaky Habs Fan]

Buffalo's forward prospects are much better

Yeah right...

Vanek=Kostitsyn(down the road)
Roy<Higgins(Higgins will be the best player of these two but Roy will be good)
Paille<Chipchura(Paille offense in the NHL will not be very good)
Stafford<=Perezhogin(hard to say with these two...different type of player but right now, Perezhogin is the best player)

Bottom line, Montreal's foward are better...But I have to admit that you have the edge in front of the net...

 

[MontrealSF]

Agreed...other than that.....I liked the write up and the rankings. I'm still confused as to why Montreal has managed to crack the top 5 two years in a row with such an average group of prospects.

I guess that's because you might not know much about Montreal prospects.

It happens.

 

[nomorekids]

Yeah right...

Vanek=Kostitsyn(down the road)
Roy<Higgins(Higgins will be the best player of these two but Roy will be good)
Paille<Chipchura(Paille offense in the NHL will not be very good)
Stafford<=Perezhogin(hard to say with these two...different type of player but right now, Perezhogin is the best player)

Bottom line, Montreal's foward are better...But I have to admit that you have the edge in front of the net...

i just ripped that kid for saying buffalo should be higher...but there's no way Kostitsyn's "potential" should be used to balance him out with Vanek, because if both reach their "potential," Vanek is still considerably better.

 

[nomorekids]

I guess that's because you might not know much about Montreal prospects.

It happens.

Nice response. I guess fans of 29 other teams don't know much about Montreal prospects, either. One or two...we can call it an anomaly..but pretty much everyone is crying foul over this. Must be a conspiracy...

 

[Enoch]

I guess that's because you might not know much about Montreal prospects.

It happens.

Or Maybe it is because I think they are an average group of prospects that many other organizations match in quality, if not quantity.

 

[Freaky Habs Fan]

i just ripped that kid for saying buffalo should be higher...but there's no way Kostitsyn's "potential" should be used to balance him out with Vanek, because if both reach their "potential," Vanek is still considerably better.

Right now, Vanek seems to be way better than Kostitsyn but down the road, Vanek will be a sniper and Kostitsyn will be a more complete player...

More goals to Vanek
More points to Kostitsyn

***If they both reach their potential

 

[MontrealSF]

Or Maybe it is because I think they are an average group of prospects that many other organizations match in quality, if not quantity.

I'd like to hear that. You rank a team by its depth at every position. The only need the Canadiens have is an offensive defenseman. Everything else is set. Skilled forwards, defensive defensemen, defensive forwards, goaltenders, leadership, gritty players...

Exemple : Ryan Miller might be better than Yann Danis

But

Ryan Miller, Michal Valent and Jeff Weaver are not superior to the group of Yann Danis, Jaroslav Halak and Chris Heino-Lindberg.

BTW, I wasn't part of that group.

 

[MontrealSF]

Right now, Vanek seems to be way better than Kostitsyn but down the road, Vanek will be a sniper and Kostitsyn will be a more complete player...

More goals to Vanek
More points to Kostitsyn

***If they both reach their potential

That's something we can't tell. As of right now, I agree that Vanek is a better prospect than Kostitsyn.

 

[Gardebut30]

The Hawks dont have any prospects named "Dmitri Vorobiev."

We would've been higher if we picked him ahead of Mitch Maunu!

 

[Poochie_D]

Or Maybe it is because I think they are an average group of prospects that many other organizations match in quality, if not quantity.

you should really think before you speak

 

[Barnaby]

Yeah right...

Vanek=Kostitsyn(down the road)
Roy<Higgins(Higgins will be the best player of these two but Roy will be good)
Paille<Chipchura(Paille offense in the NHL will not be very good)
Stafford<=Perezhogin(hard to say with these two...different type of player but right now, Perezhogin is the best player)

Bottom line, Montreal's foward are better...But I have to admit that you have the edge in front of the net...

I'd Vanek over Kost any day... Id also take Stafford over Perez

 

[Enoch]

you should really think before you speak

I did think before I speak. I think the Habs have only a slightly above average group of prospects......certainly not top 5 in the NHL. I would rank several teams ahead of them for reasons of both quality and for others.....quantity. To be blunt, I really do not think what the Habs right now warrants a top 5 ranking - so sue me. I'm not alone in my thinking, and I am not being malicious about it. I'm not saying the Habs prospects suck or lack no talent........rather, I merely believe they are not nearly as good as the organizational ranking indicates.

Eric Forrest, I'm not saying you did, but I do not agree with you assessment. I am not completely ignorant of Montreal prospects, although I am certainly not an expert. However, I also am not clouded by my view of the team (not saying you are, but I am certainly not biased for or against the Canadian organization). My opinion simply is what it is - The Habs are not deserving of their 4th place ranking.....

Lastly, this is not to take away from the list, which I already have stated multiple times is very well put together.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

Nashville should have been ahead of Montreal, IMO.

I also don't understand why the Oilers are so high. Four of their top prospects, Deslauriers, Niinimaki, Lynch, and Woywitka, (which were all listed in the top six of the HF Oilers preseason top 20 prospects) had awful or disappointing years. Most of the Oilers media roundtable have written Mihknov off and think Salmelainen is done in North America.

I can't speak for many prospects out-side of the Oiler org., but Schremp,Pouliot,Jacques,Dubnyk,Paukovich,Reddox,Brodziak,Winchester, and a few others improved to help off-set some of the dissappointments "Niinimaki,Woywitka,Lynch,Mikhnov,Salmelainen". They did drop from 4th to 6th, and I still like the teams depth up front and in goal "even Deslauriers", although the D isn't looking quite so strong with Woywitka and Lynch turning in putrid seasons. Hope this may explain their ranking.

 

[cj]

*edit* Sorry, just editing out something stupid.

Anyways...

I would probably have the Habs lower and have the Flyers significantly higher (at least above the Thrashers), but I'm not nearly as knowledgeable about prospects as the people who do these lists are. When all is said and done, it's just a matter of opinion is it not?

 

[King'sPawn]

I agree with Enoch and co. I think the Canadiens are ranked too high. But it's a minor issue; the more important point is the hard work put in to making the rankings and for the write-up. Thanks guys!

 

[MontrealSF]

I did think before I speak. I think the Habs have only a slightly above average group of prospects......certainly not top 5 in the NHL. I would rank several teams ahead of them for reasons of both quality and for others.....quantity. To be blunt, I really do not think what the Habs right now warrants a top 5 ranking - so sue me. I'm not alone in my thinking, and I am not being malicious about it. I'm not saying the Habs prospects suck or lack no talent........rather, I merely believe they are not nearly as good as the organizational ranking indicates.

Eric Forrest, I'm not saying you did, but I do not agree with you assessment. I am not completely ignorant of Montreal prospects, although I am certainly not an expert. However, I also am not clouded by my view of the team (not saying you are, but I am certainly not biased for or against the Canadian organization). My opinion simply is what it is - The Habs are not deserving of their 4th place ranking.....

Lastly, this is not to take away from the list, which I already have stated multiple times is very well put together.

No problem, everyone is inclined to his opinion. Some might agree with you, some might not.

I see it like this : The Habs were fifth last year. They added a glaring need with Chipchura who played great in the WHL playoffs. Add to this that Perezhogin played for Russia everywhere internationaly and that Higgins, Plekanec and Danis got strong seasons. Then you have new players in Grabovsky and Streit who gave the Habs new tools.

The overall depth of Montreal, to me, when I look at both teams pages, is superior to Nashville.

I haven't debate since the old hockeyboards.com forums...

 

[MontrealSF]

I agree with Enoch and co. I think the Canadiens are ranked too high. But it's a minor issue; the more important point is the hard work put in to making the rankings and for the write-up. Thanks guys!

Yup, congrats to them and we'll hope the Top 50 will be as good!

 

[MN_Gopher]

I found it odd that Stafford gets mentioned and Potulny and Irman did not. Both Irman and Potulny had more points and those two were our best players. Playing both PP and PK. Seems like where you were drafted has something to do with how you are recognized. And last year was Potulny's first full year. Eligibility wise he will be junior though. They are by no means going to be locks but should be in teams top crop of prospects.