Prospect Info: Penguins #5 prospect
- Thread starter Burgs
- Start date
Malkinstheman
Registered User
- Aug 12, 2012
- 9,351
- 8,216
Paulie Gualtieri
R.I.P. Tony Sirico
- May 18, 2016
- 12,328
- 3,062
FreeBobbyFarnham
Registered User
Going with Johnson because he's closer to possibly playing than Lafferty (older, already turning pro), and appears to have a higher offensive ceiling than either Lafferty or Bluegers.
FreeBobbyFarnham
Registered User
I don't think Johnson has a higher offensive upside. Lafferty played on a worse team than Johnson and has produced better at a younger age.
Yes, but before this past season, Lafferty's offensive production was pathetic. So while I definitely like to look at Lafferty with the glass half-full and have high hopes, it's too small a sample size in an otherwise thus far underwhelming career before I anoint him one of the Pens top prospects. It is also worth noting that he hasn't cracked the Top 10 Penguins own internal prospect rankings (such as in The Hockey News or Post Gazette). So I think he's being somewhat overvalued and given too much credit a bit too early after just one good season.
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,679
- 46,551
Between Blueger and Simon for me. At this point, I still see all of the guys listed as long shots to become full time NHLers. So I picked between the two who are closest to being NHL-ready.
I went with Blueger because I think, with the massive hole at 3C/4C, he has the best shot between him and Simon of actually getting a chance to stick sooner rather than later. Unless they (the Pens) see Simon also as a center, then who knows. But if I recall, he's played on the wing when he was called up, so like Guentzel, that's probably what they see him as at the NHL level.
I went with Blueger because I think, with the massive hole at 3C/4C, he has the best shot between him and Simon of actually getting a chance to stick sooner rather than later. Unless they (the Pens) see Simon also as a center, then who knows. But if I recall, he's played on the wing when he was called up, so like Guentzel, that's probably what they see him as at the NHL level.
WayneSid9987
Registered User
- Nov 24, 2009
- 30,053
- 5,676
Since Gus won and looking at the board now, i'm gonna venture outside of Bleuger, who i see as a 4th line C/W at best, and go for a i think this guy could be really good if he got some luck with his health: Lukas Bengtsson.
I'm probably gonna push Bleuger down some now(even tho he may win #5) since i see some Rust-like potentials in the system.
I'm probably gonna push Bleuger down some now(even tho he may win #5) since i see some Rust-like potentials in the system.
steelcityassault
Registered User
Doesn't always necessarily matter.. players develop at different paces over time
Went with Simon. Feel like he's that little bit more likely to stick.
I would have voted Archibald if he was on though, assuming he counts as a prospect.
I will continue to ask for Almari after Archibald. Or maybe before. His stats plus Sexton's conviction that he will play in Pittsburgh are good enough for me.
I would have voted Archibald if he was on though, assuming he counts as a prospect.
I will continue to ask for Almari after Archibald. Or maybe before. His stats plus Sexton's conviction that he will play in Pittsburgh are good enough for me.
Shady Machine
Registered User
- Aug 6, 2010
- 36,704
- 8,141
Blueger I guess. He's our best center prospect at the moment and we need him to be something, so here's hoping.
ncm7772
Registered User
Zero Pucks
Size matters
- May 17, 2009
- 4,589
- 303
I'm not sure how you can discredit Lafferty for all of those things, and then say Adam Johnson is the right pick here. Johnson has only had one good college season (as a 22 year old no less) and has never been in the Penguins internal lop 10 list (which frankly doesn't really mean much to me) as well. If you wanted to say Simon is the guy here because he's played two professional seasons with decent production, then you might have a point.
Last edited:
Tasty Biscuits
with fancy sauce
Asuna
Lvl 94 Sub-Leader
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I think the next 4 should be Blueger, Lauzon, Simon and Olund in that order. Possibly have Johnson in Olund's spot.
Yes, and that is why I hope he will play C in WBS. But he's always been listed as a W before we saw him play C at the WC. Unless anyone knows if he played any C in college?
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
ColePens
RIP Fugu Buffaloed & parabola
Zero Pucks
Size matters
- May 17, 2009
- 4,589
- 303
Yeah. I'm not really sure Archie should be considered a prospect. If he was, he should of been added at the beginning or the second poll. Adding him now is just gonna cause a major **** storm.
One way deal=not a prospect imo.
I voted Simon. I think he can be a solid middle six wing. I see his upside as a solid two way guy who averages fifteen a year. That's not a prediction, more like a hopeful projection. I think we need a center more, and centers are more valuable in general, but I see Bluegger as a bottom line center really at best. Maybe I'm wrong, not claiming to be an expert. But I'm not sure why we incorporate our needs when ranking prospects, I don't agree with that line of thinking.
I voted Simon. I think he can be a solid middle six wing. I see his upside as a solid two way guy who averages fifteen a year. That's not a prediction, more like a hopeful projection. I think we need a center more, and centers are more valuable in general, but I see Bluegger as a bottom line center really at best. Maybe I'm wrong, not claiming to be an expert. But I'm not sure why we incorporate our needs when ranking prospects, I don't agree with that line of thinking.
