Hockey's Future Spring 2007 Organizational Rankings (16-30)

[mooseOAK*]

While I agree the TMLF should be a bit higher they have neither the depth nor the "so-far" success of CALG. I'm no fan of either, but only on HF could a guy who's never played a game in North America be better than a guy who played quite well in the NHL. Not to mention Boyd. Fact is CALG's prospects have made greater strides and have greater depth than Toronto's org, so I can't see how TOR should be ahead of CAL .

Also take a look at the HF report on the Maple Leaf rookies this season: other than White, a bunch of 24+ yr old callups. Doesn't scream AHL/NHL depth to me at the moment.

Tlrusty, pogge (who struggled in AHL) are not there yet and strahlman might not be either.

But I can't see how TOR would be that much higher on the list or disagree with the article's summary of their prospect pool. TOR has been in the bottom 7-8 for 3 yrs with good reason and as much as I like Thirsty and pogge and the others, they are still weaker. I can easily see at least 15 teams who have better prospects and depth than TOR.

It's funny how a team that has been ranked near the bottom all this time had two players, Steen and Wellwood in the top 10 in rookie scoring last season and Ian White second in rookie scoring this year and more players from the 2001 and 2002 drafts in the NHL than any other team or close to it.

Stralman was a first team all star in the SEL, as a 20 year old, his partner is 34 years old. Nikolai Kulemin led the RSL in goal scoring, as a 20 year old. One doesn't get mentioned at all and the other is just a throwaway.

What's the big love for Calgary's prospects? Looking at who they drafted it looks like they assigned the scouts bicycles because they didn't seem to stray far from home.

 

[Leaf Army]

Yeah they definitely got Anton Stralman mixed up with Johan Dahlberg.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

The Penguins future is so bleak!

 

[Jaded-Fan]

The Penguins future is so bleak!

*chuckles* . . . with so many making the leap to the big club, and pencil in Letang to make that leap next year it would have been virtually impossible to be any higher. The really telling part of these lists is the recent graduates part. If you have a ton of great players listed (the Pens have had similar each of the last 3 years) then it is understandable. Those that say 'none' are doing something wrong. I can not think of a really bad draft for the Pens this millenium, the Pens have hit on the obvious picks, but never really missed even when picking lower in the first round early on this decade with Orpik and Armstrong and found a good number of late round gems as well, like Letang in the third round in the Crosby draft. If that draft were redone it was like they got another top five pick to add to Crosby. In hindsight I can not think of much better they could have done and that they are not at the very bottom speaks to that.

 

[Chrisd]

Sure the penguins have drafted well, but most of their top players have fallen into their lap....

crosby duhhh, malkin duhhhh again. Jordan staal again..... Fleury....you get the theme all top 2 picks.

Whitney was top 5 or 6 I believe...

It's easy to look good when you are picking AT THE TOP, in drafts with loaded top end talent. Now they have picked up some good talent like Letang and guys like christensen and others but I'll judge the penguins drafting on how they do in the next 5 years, when they aren't getting GODLY players basically given to them.

 

[Gallagbi]

Yeah they definitely got Anton Stralman mixed up with Johan Dahlberg.

I hope so. The list is poorly done. In 2006 the Leafs apperantly had alot of NHL calibre players, according to HF's list. This was their strength. "Quantity". Now, in 2007, after graduating 2 (3 if you count Bell) our depth is gone. Then you have Dahlberg the "Boom or bust" pick, who HF believes is a "safe pick".

 

[Winston Wolf]

Maybe the reason the Leafs aren't higher is because people aren't buying the hype about some of their prospects, some of us remember the 'Cola' wars.

Dude, the Cola wars had nothing to do with Carlo Colaiacovo.

 

[Bill_Crosby*]

It's funny how a team that has been ranked near the bottom all this time had two players, Steen and Wellwood in the top 10 in rookie scoring last season and Ian White second in rookie scoring this year and more players from the 2001 and 2002 drafts in the NHL than any other team or close to it.

Stralman was a first team all star in the SEL, as a 20 year old, his partner is 34 years old. Nikolai Kulemin led the RSL in goal scoring, as a 20 year old. One doesn't get mentioned at all and the other is just a throwaway.

What's the big love for Calgary's prospects? Looking at who they drafted it looks like they assigned the scouts bicycles because they didn't seem to stray far from home.

I noticed a North American-centric, borderline racist, attitude on this site when it comes to the SEL and the RSL. They are both professional mens leagues in two of the strongest hockey countries in the world. I think it's really egotistical of people to totally dismiss any accolades that players in these leagues acheive because "it is not the NHL".

 

[Walzy]

i'm a bit surprised James Neal is not listed in the Stars' top5

 

[Chaos]

27. Dallas Stars

There's a shocker.

 

[Chaos]

While the rankings are good for reads, they must be taken with a grain of salt. Doesn't anyone remember 2 or 3 years ago, the Oilers were 3rd on the list...

More like taken with a big bag of salt. Im amazed at how Detroit can stay in the top 15. I guess thats what having a good development reputation can get you.

 

[Guy Flaming]

Ah, initial agreement! Do you mean that some writers questioned the rank at one point of the evaluation? One has to wonder about it.

How much weight does the voice of the Online Editior (you) carry? I'd also like to know, which writers were actually involved in composing the Top30. How many games of the prospects did these writers actually saw?

According to your profile you are located in Atlanta. I doubt that you can follow a lot of current prospects on a regular basis. Just saying.

Wouldn't a writer like Guy Flaming (for example) be in a far better position to judge talent, because of the WHL teams in "his" region?

I was on the committee. I had Atlanta 20th on my initial list and 21st on my second go around. The seperation between teams in the 15-23 range, in my mind, is extremely minimal so the fact they ended up 19th is totally fine with me.

To me Bryan Little and Ondrej Pavelec are stars in the making. I also really like Chad Denny and he's 11th on the top 20.

Not that Holly needs me to but I'd like to point out that not only has she been to all the ATL camps but she's attended a few others for other Southern teams as well, Nashville for one. She's also got the ECHL in her back yard. She's more than qualified and has lots of access.

She had no more say on the ranking than any of the rest of us.

 

[Seph]

Atlanta is too high (is it just me or does this often seem to be the case?) and I'm suprised NYI is in the top 15 after trading O'Marra, Nilsson, and Grebeshkov to the Oilers.

yes its true NYI shouldnt be in the top 15 !

Why is this so hard to believe? Yes, NYI traded some prospects. Two of them. But their prospect pool is very very deep. Though it lacks in the high end talent, that depth allows them to lose a few guys and maintain much of its overall strength. Losing Grebeshkov isn't that big of a deal when we have similar guys who are younger and playing in the NHL right now in Gervais and Campoli. Add in Kohn and O'Neill's development this season (both of whom are looking better than Grebeshkov right now) and it's easy to see why he was moved.

Nilsson was badly outplayed by Tambellini this season, and arguably was even outplayed by Franz Nielsen (at worst, according to the coaches and those that watched, Franz was as good as Robert). O'Marra's was the hardest to give up, but let's face it, his junior production was no better than other very strong 2way forwards that the Isles have in Colliton or Comeau (could actually make a pretty strong case that Comeau was the better juniors player, and Colliton's junior career was highly comparable). Then factor in other guys like Nokelainen, Marcinko, Bergenheim (coming off an EXCELLENT season in a much better league), and O'Marra just isn't as indispensible as you might think.

These guys were all moved because they were expendable. Not saying they're bad prospects or anything, but when there's a log jam, something has to give. Isles had a glut of 2way forwards, smallish offensive Ds and risky boom/bust guys. Losing one of each doesn't set them back nearly as much as you might think.

 

[FacelessButcher]

Why do you think those three were traded?

I thought it was because you were looking to improve your team in the here and now in the hopes of getting into the playoffs. (which you did )

Their ranking, at least to the Isles organization, had dropped and simultaneously other prospects emerged to overtake their status.

There's this on-going HF logic that "Well the Isles traded three of their top prospects to Edmonton." Maybe on HF broadband, where speculation rules, that's the truth. But to the NYI, Nilsson, O'Marra and Grebs plummeted some what and were essentially overwritten by the emergence of Rhett RahkShani, Okposo, Blake Comeau, Sean Bergenheim, Tambellini and Frans Nielson.

Nilsson did not display the consistent work ethic and intensity Nolan was looking for, dating back from last July's prospect Camp. So he didn't fit into the culture, though admittedly he was my fav. O'Marra had/still has an injury history and was replaceable. Grebs was also replaceable due to the emergence of a few D prospects, most notably Bruno Gervais.

That said, I still expect them to be 15th and nothing higher.

I'm not going to pretend I know all the inner workings of the Isles prospects, heck 2 of the guys you mentioned (Rahkshani and Nielson) I've never even seen play. The fact of the matter is you were ranked in 15th in the last organizational rankings and since then you have lost 3 guys (2 of which were in your top 5, last org. ranking) regardless of whether or not you are high on them, all 3 have a realistic chance of making a career for themselves in the NHL. I don't think it's a unreasonable assumption that losing 3 quality prospects would/should have a negative impact on your organizational ranking. Maybe you have had a bunch of guys step their game up, maybe people who were ranked above you dropped like a rock, but you have to atleast admit it's a bit of an eye brow raiser from an exterior perspective that your ranking has either improved or stayed the same after moving Grebeshkov, Nilsson, and O'Marra.

 

[Seph]

I'm not going to pretend I know all the inner workings of the Isles prospects, heck 2 of the guys you mentioned (Rahkshani and Nielson) I've never even seen play. The fact of the matter is you were ranked in 15th in the last organizational rankings and since then you have lost 3 guys (2 of which were in your top 5, last org. ranking) regardless of whether or not you are high on them, all 3 have a realistic chance of making a career for themselves in the NHL. I don't think it's a unreasonable assumption that losing 3 quality prospects would/should have a negative impact on your organizational ranking. Maybe you have had a bunch of guys step their game up, maybe people who were ranked above you dropped like a rock, but you have to atleast admit it's a bit of an eye brow raiser from an exterior perspective that your ranking has either improved or stayed the same after moving Grebeshkov, Nilsson, and O'Marra.

But you also have to factor in the development of many other prospects. Nielsen had a standout year in the AHL, once he adjusted to the NA game, breaking the franchise record for consecutive game point streak. Tambellini lit it up in AHL and really seemed to get the hang of scoring in the NHL in his call ups -- towards the end he went something like 9 points in 9 games, and while watching there was no questioning that his linemates played better when he was on the line than without. Okposo had a monster season in the NCAA obviously, which has raised his stock considerably since this time last year, and Rakhshani wasn't far behind him either in terms of scoring. O'Neill emerged as no longer the best defenseman on a bad team, but rather the best defenseman on one of the top teams in the NCAA. Dustin Kohn doubled his point production from last season and was one of the top offensive D's in the WHL. Marcinko potted 19 goals which was surprisingly good production from a defensive center in his first year of NA hockey. Nokelainen looks like he's getting past his knee injury, something that dropped his value a lot this time last year. Comeau's showing that he can produce in pro hockey by putting up 45pts in 60 games in his rookie campaign in the AHL. Bergenheim had a tremendous season playing against men in Sweden. Basically, a lot of guys with question marks made big strides towards answering those question marks. Is that enough to make up for the loss of those two? Maybe, maybe not, but you can certainly make the case that it is.

If you view the rankings as who has hoarded the most high picks, then yeah, I'd agree that the Isles should drop. But if you actually look at how our prospects have developed over the year, I personally have more confidence in our prospects now than I did last year. I would also point out that maybe it has as much to do with what happened with other teams' prospects, since this is ranking not a rating. It is possible for the Isles' prospect pool to get worse and still rise in the rankings dependent on what happens with the teams around us' prospect pools. Especially when you factor in that the only prospect we had graduate was Gervais, who was never rated very highly around here -- So if the other teams in our range had two high picks graduate it would affect their ranking the same as us trading two high picks away. And Grebeshkov, well, he hasn't been highly touted in quite a while now.

 

[40oz]

But you also have to factor in the development of many other prospects. Nielsen had a standout year in the AHL, once he adjusted to the NA game, breaking the franchise record for consecutive game point streak. Tambellini lit it up in AHL and really seemed to get the hang of scoring in the NHL in his call ups -- towards the end he went something like 9 points in 9 games, and while watching there was no questioning that his linemates played better when he was on the line than without. Okposo had a monster season in the NCAA obviously, which has raised his stock considerably since this time last year, and Rakhshani wasn't far behind him either in terms of scoring. O'Neill emerged as no longer the best defenseman on a bad team, but rather the best defenseman on one of the top teams in the NCAA. Dustin Kohn doubled his point production from last season and was one of the top offensive D's in the WHL. Marcinko potted 19 goals which was surprisingly good production from a defensive center in his first year of NA hockey. Nokelainen looks like he's getting past his knee injury, something that dropped his value a lot this time last year. Comeau's showing that he can produce in pro hockey by putting up 45pts in 60 games in his rookie campaign in the AHL. Bergenheim had a tremendous season playing against men in Sweden. Basically, a lot of guys with question marks made big strides towards answering those question marks. Is that enough to make up for the loss of those two? Maybe, maybe not, but you can certainly make the case that it is.

If you view the rankings as who has hoarded the most high picks, then yeah, I'd agree that the Isles should drop. But if you actually look at how our prospects have developed over the year, I personally have more confidence in our prospects now than I did last year. I would also point out that maybe it has as much to do with what happened with other teams' prospects, since this is ranking not a rating. It is possible for the Isles' prospect pool to get worse and still rise in the rankings dependent on what happens with the teams around us' prospect pools. Especially when you factor in that the only prospect we had graduate was Gervais, who was never rated very highly around here -- So if the other teams in our range had two high picks graduate it would affect their ranking the same as us trading two high picks away. And Grebeshkov, well, he hasn't been highly touted in quite a while now.

http://hockeysfuture.com/articles/9478

 

[chriss_co]

Two quick points (that I have mentioned elsewhere):

Omaha made the AHL playoffs with a younger roster (1) from which the parent team was able to draw players when they needed them (2). And these players played some quality minutes. That's exactly how things should work.

The Marlies, with an older roster of players, missed the playoffs and really have nobody other than Pogge who will make the parent team. Not unless there are majour changes at the top anyway. This is a clear example of what not to try at home.

So I have no idea why people are trying to compare the two organizations and say that they are really closer than they appear. They aren't. Calgary appears to be an organization who knows what a development team is for. And they use it towards those purposes. The Leafs, on the other hand, seem to have little idea what a farm team does or the importance that it can have to an organization trying to rebuild and reload.

well said

 

[Gutchecktime]

The thing is...

If you know BOTH prospect pools VERY WELL, you can be the judge of whether or not one is better than the other. I'm a Leaf fan and therefore obviously NOT as up to date on Calgary's prospect pool as I am the Leafs. So I can't really comment as to whether the Leafs' group of prospects is BETTER than the Flames...

BUT if you are going to say Calgary's Top 5 prospects are better than the Leafs' Top 5 prospects.. FINE but at least know who the Leafs' Top 5 Prospects are... where is Stralman? Why is Dahlberg there? If you can't even get the Leafs Top 5 Prospects down it brings doubt as to whether the actual rankings by team are correct. I think that is why Leaf fans are questioning the list. So Flames fans, calm the heck down

*I would say though, that Toronto's prospects are better than Atlanta's.

 

[chriss_co]

It's funny how a team that has been ranked near the bottom all this time had two players, Steen and Wellwood in the top 10 in rookie scoring last season and Ian White second in rookie scoring this year and more players from the 2001 and 2002 drafts in the NHL than any other team or close to it.

Stralman was a first team all star in the SEL, as a 20 year old, his partner is 34 years old. Nikolai Kulemin led the RSL in goal scoring, as a 20 year old. One doesn't get mentioned at all and the other is just a throwaway.

What's the big love for Calgary's prospects? Looking at who they drafted it looks like they assigned the scouts bicycles because they didn't seem to stray far from home.

quick question, will stralman or kulemin make the leafs team next year?

i know boyd and taratukhin are almost locks

 

[Gutchecktime]

quick question, will stralman or kulemin make the leafs team next year?

I think there's almost no question Kulemin would next year but he signed a contract to stay another year with Metallurg.

Stralman, well we'll see. On a team without so much money locked up on defensemen, I think without a doubt... On the Leafs, who knows.

I don't know how HF can sit there with a straight face and say the best we can hope for with our defenseman is for them to be a 5th or 6th defenseman. Stralman is one of, if not the best d-man in the SEL as far as I've heard. And only 20. Come on. I'm more mad about the comments than the actual ranking because it just takes away their credibility IMO.

 

[mooseOAK*]

quick question, will stralman or kulemin make the leafs team next year?

i know boyd and taratukhin are almost locks

I doubt it but the Leafs will have 6 players at least on the roster that are the same age or younger than Taratukhin even if they don't.

 

[Amadeus]

quick question, will stralman or kulemin make the leafs team next year?

i know boyd and taratukhin are almost locks

Stralman has signed a contract with the Leafs and is coming to Toronto for training camp. He should be a lock to make the Leafs roster but seeing the depth in Toronto's D, nothing is set in stone. Kaberle, McCabe, Kubina, Colaiacovo, Gill, White are rounding out your top 6 right there. That does not make it easier for Stralman to jump right in, unless the management truly feels he should be plucked in the lineup. However, many of the Leafs fans, including myself feel that a trade should be made to make a spot for Stralman. He is just too good of a talent for not be playing with the Leafs.

With Kulemin, our management feels that he is ready to play in the NHL right now. He had an unbelievable season in the RSL and scored close to 30 goals this year (more if you include the playoffs). However, he has signed a one year contract with the same RSL team and all signs indicate that he will stay in Russia for one more year. However, Jeff Jackson, Leafs assistant GM, talked on the Leafs Lunch saying that everything is negotiable and that Kulemin may just end up playing for the Leafs next season. Again, he's too good of a talent to not be playing for the Leafs.

That is the situation at the moment.

 

[Amadeus]

I think there's almost no question Kulemin would next year but he signed a contract to stay another year with Metallurg.

Stralman, well we'll see. On a team without so much money locked up on defensemen, I think without a doubt... On the Leafs, who knows.

I don't know how HF can sit there with a straight face and say the best we can hope for with our defenseman is for them to be a 5th or 6th defenseman. Stralman is one of, if not the best d-man in the SEL as far as I've heard. And only 20. Come on. I'm more mad about the comments than the actual ranking because it just takes away their credibility IMO.

Just to add to that. I've heard some Swedish fans even saying he might have been the best player in the SEL last year. Not that he was or anything, but many gave him honorable mentions.

Toronto has a good one there, boys. I'm excited.

 

[PunjabiOil*]

How does the graduation criteria work?

Is it really fair to penalize a team like Colorado regarding Stastny? The best prospects start making an impact at an earlier age, and don't usually spend 4 years in the NCAA or more than 1 year in the AHL. If you're in the system for too long, you're less likely to become an impact NHL player

An objective criteria would be only recognizing prospects from say age 18-22.

 

[Kevin Forbes]

How does the graduation criteria work?

Is it really fair to penalize a team like Colorado regarding Stastny? The best prospects start making an impact at an earlier age, and don't usually spend 4 years in the NCAA or more than 1 year in the AHL. If you're in the system for too long, you're less likely to become an impact NHL player

An objective criteria would be only recognizing prospects from say age 18-22.

Are you saying Stastny isn't an NHL player?