Prospect Info: St. Louis Blues Prospect Ranking #5

[kimzey59]

That probably was a bit too snarky. I apologize. I just think the Thompson support is more SNTS (shiny new toy syndrome) than "it" factor. Nobody was pushing for this guy before we drafted him. I checked PerryT's post history. He said nary a word about Thompson leading up to the draft. If he had indeed watched him play multiple times and if he was indeed such a great pick with such an "it" factor, I think he would have posted about him before we picked him. Maybe I am wrong there. But to me its reads of post-pick justification.

The general vagueness of the description doesn't help my opinion in the matter either. Saying he does it all for his team, when he doesn't do it all (ES scoring) is disingenuous. You can say that one line teams score mostly on the PP, but UConn had 2/3 of its goals at ES. And Thompson only had 1 of those 59 ES goals. Yes he is super young playing on a bad team. So he could totally turn it around. But he has a TON of stuff to work on and a lot of red flags. From what I have seen in videos and read from scouting reports, he currently has little ability to get open on crowded ice, and little ability to create for himself. That doesn't scream "it" factor to me.

Most people didn't mention him because he was viewed as a sort of "safe" pick. The scouting reports were pretty well known and most people had a good idea how he projected. However, leading into a draft where you have a very low 1st; most people are going to look more at the "fallers" than the safe guys. They want that "home run" swing instead of a safe bet.

With Thompson; he's got a massive frame, a very good shot, plays very good defense(he plays defense on the PK, not too many guys in College are good enough to pull that off) and seems to can good puck skills. He just needs to grow into his body. For his projection; he has a pretty decent range. I think his floor is as a Joel Ward/Troy Brouwer type 3rd liner and his ceiling is somewhere in the Ladd/Backes/Wheeler range of 1st line PF's.

Compared to what else we have in the system right now, he's at worst one of our 3 best forward prospects and at best could be the "gem" in our system right now.

 

[bleedblue1223]

UCONN was a 1-line team, and teams stacked their defenses against that line. It's sort of like how MacEachern had limited offensive production for a few years, but played very well. College teams with limited talent holds back the players that actually have talent.

On the opposite side, Hayes was over-hyped because his production was inflated from playing with Johnny Hockey.

 

[Majorityof1]

I disagree with his floor. Thompson could very well never be an NHL player. By saying his floor is 3rd liner, you are saying he is guaranteed to make the NHL. That's not the case. Thompson is not a safe pick. He was a pick coveted because of his size, and what that means to his potential. But he has yet to prove anything. That is far from safe.

Then he is being compared to MacEachern who hasn't even been mentioned yet in this poll because he doesn't deserve to be mentioned yet. He is at best a 3rd liner. Thompson is very much in line with that projection. Sometimes good players go to bad college programs. Other times, decent players go to bad college programs because they have no choice. Thompson went to a bad program because he had no other choice. Then he hit a growth spurt and it helped him succeed in that program. But all his other skills are still the "meh" skill that didn't allow him to go anywhere better.

I do agree that he is one of our better forward prospects (not 3rd best though, 4th or 5th). But that speaks to how horrible our forward prospects are more than any skill from Thompson.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I did not compare him to MacEachern, just their situations. I'm also higher on him than others, I think he has a chance at a middle 6 role.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I very much disagree with the Backes/Ladd/Ward comparisons. He's not aggressive enough for that type of role and his skill set will not translate that way anyhow. He relies on his puck skills much more than his body. That's not to say he shifts away from physicality, but he's not going full wrecking ball on the ice. Ironically, if he was playing like the aforementioned players, he wouldn't have only scored 1 ES goal. He would have been using his frame to strip pucks if he was, and that would have led to much more offensive chances for him, regardless of the poor team around him.

He plays a lot like Bryan Little, or to a lesser degree, Corey Perry (those being stylistic comparisons only). Honestly, he's just a safe pick to make the NHL with huge growth potential. The likliehood of him reaching it is a huge question mark because of his environment, so only time will tell.

In my opinion, our prospect with the biggest "it" factor is Jordan Kyrou. The guy plays like Jason Spezza. He just needs to work on his strength and I think he'll be our top prospect soon.

 

[tfriede2]

I disagree with his floor. Thompson could very well never be an NHL player. By saying his floor is 3rd liner, you are saying he is guaranteed to make the NHL. That's not the case. Thompson is not a safe pick. He was a pick coveted because of his size, and what that means to his potential. But he has yet to prove anything. That is far from safe.

Then he is being compared to MacEachern who hasn't even been mentioned yet in this poll because he doesn't deserve to be mentioned yet. He is at best a 3rd liner. Thompson is very much in line with that projection. Sometimes good players go to bad college programs. Other times, decent players go to bad college programs because they have no choice. Thompson went to a bad program because he had no other choice. Then he hit a growth spurt and it helped him succeed in that program. But all his other skills are still the "meh" skill that didn't allow him to go anywhere better.

I do agree that he is one of our better forward prospects (not 3rd best though, 4th or 5th). But that speaks to how horrible our forward prospects are more than any skill from Thompson.

Same could be said for Parayko. Parayko blossomed in college, and Thompson is off to a good start.

 

[Oberyn]

I very much disagree with the Backes/Ladd/Ward comparisons. He's not aggressive enough for that type of role and his skill set will not translate that way anyhow. He relies on his puck skills much more than his body. That's not to say he shifts away from physicality, but he's not going full wrecking ball on the ice. Ironically, if he was playing like the aforementioned players, he wouldn't have only scored 1 ES goal. He would have been using his frame to strip pucks if he was, and that would have led to much more offensive chances for him, regardless of the poor team around him.

He plays a lot like Bryan Little, or to a lesser degree, Corey Perry (those being stylistic comparisons only). Honestly, he's just a safe pick to make the NHL with huge growth potential. The likliehood of him reaching it is a huge question mark because of his environment, so only time will tell.

In my opinion, our prospect with the biggest "it" factor is Jordan Kyrou. The guy plays like Jason Spezza. He just needs to work on his strength and I think he'll be our top prospect soon.

Agreed. I've been watching a lot of Kyrou since we drafted him through videos and he possesses a tremendous amount of talent. His skating and hands are top notch, he's got very good playmaking abilities, and his shot is quite decent. Like you said, his greatest hurdle will be getting stronger and more physical, but there's a lot of potential in Kyrou. I see him having a breakout year in the OHL next season.

 

[Ranksu]

Agreed. I've been watching a lot of Kyrou since we drafted him through videos and he possesses a tremendous amount of talent. His skating and hands are top notch, he's got very good playmaking abilities, and his shot is quite decent. Like you said, his greatest hurdle will be getting stronger and more physical, but there's a lot of potential in Kyrou. I see him having a breakout year in the OHL next season.

Which player could make some comparison about Kyrou, who most closely resembles him?

 

[kimzey59]

Which player could make some comparison about Kyrou, who most closely resembles him?

Antoine Vermette IMO

 

[Oberyn]

Which player could make some comparison about Kyrou, who most closely resembles him?

Spezza is a pretty good comparable as mentioned earlier. Patrick Sharp is another comparable stylistically, though I doubt Kyrou will score as many goals as Sharp does.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

That probably was a bit too snarky. I apologize. I just think the Thompson support is more SNTS (shiny new toy syndrome) than "it" factor. Nobody was pushing for this guy before we drafted him. I checked PerryT's post history. He said nary a word about Thompson leading up to the draft. If he had indeed watched him play multiple times and if he was indeed such a great pick with such an "it" factor, I think he would have posted about him before we picked him. Maybe I am wrong there. But to me its reads of post-pick justification.

The general vagueness of the description doesn't help my opinion in the matter either. Saying he does it all for his team, when he doesn't do it all (ES scoring) is disingenuous. You can say that one line teams score mostly on the PP, but UConn had 2/3 of its goals at ES. And Thompson only had 1 of those 59 ES goals. Yes he is super young playing on a bad team. So he could totally turn it around. But he has a TON of stuff to work on and a lot of red flags. From what I have seen in videos and read from scouting reports, he currently has little ability to get open on crowded ice, and little ability to create for himself. That doesn't scream "it" factor to me.

I knew nothing about him other than Bill Armstrong had him pegged as a "first round talent" significantly higher than anyone else on the board when the Blues picked (so that they traded up to ensure getting him).

But after researching him and seeing his first impression at prospect camp (by secondhand reports mostly) his ceiling has me excited. The quotes from his coaches and the Blues staff seem like credible assessments. This has contrasted with the general disappointment that a couple posters expressed at the draft (when I knew nothing at all about him).

Maybe my enthusiasm is surprised optimism at how good of a prospect he looks like after expecting him to be marginal based on other informed poster's comments. But he looks like he could be a contributor on this team in a few years in a position of importance. I like that the team took a chance on a guy that needs to grow into his frame, but his has the raw material there to be a good player.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

That probably was a bit too snarky. I apologize. I just think the Thompson support is more SNTS (shiny new toy syndrome) than "it" factor. Nobody was pushing for this guy before we drafted him. I checked PerryT's post history. He said nary a word about Thompson leading up to the draft. If he had indeed watched him play multiple times and if he was indeed such a great pick with such an "it" factor, I think he would have posted about him before we picked him. Maybe I am wrong there. But to me its reads of post-pick justification.

The general vagueness of the description doesn't help my opinion in the matter either. Saying he does it all for his team, when he doesn't do it all (ES scoring) is disingenuous. You can say that one line teams score mostly on the PP, but UConn had 2/3 of its goals at ES. And Thompson only had 1 of those 59 ES goals. Yes he is super young playing on a bad team. So he could totally turn it around. But he has a TON of stuff to work on and a lot of red flags. From what I have seen in videos and read from scouting reports, he currently has little ability to get open on crowded ice, and little ability to create for himself. That doesn't scream "it" factor to me.

That's fair, but to be fair....I didn't really comment on the draft or really any particular player. I just didn't follow it enough this year. I think my only comment was not to fall too in love with the star center from the Q as it is much lower tier major junior hockey. I probably post more on the college free agent market until you all are sick of it, but... where did Joe Mullen or Cujo come from? I guess I didn't think about him being a pick too much as most of the time these kids are either already drafted or free agents in a couple years.

Just like when I mentioned MacEachern being a player his freshman year....watch. I'll eat my words. Really...when the puck drops he wants to be the guy. He drew tons of attention against top tier talented teams. Let's see what he does with a year under his belt. I don't see a Denny Felsner here.

Also...watch MacEachern...He has learned to be a solid two way player, because he HAD to. His teammates really stunk. Watching the crap he had to handle called passes and making chances out of them was actually quite impressive. Really want to see what he does with some decent teammates.

 

[Frenzy31]

I disagree with his floor. Thompson could very well never be an NHL player. By saying his floor is 3rd liner, you are saying he is guaranteed to make the NHL. That's not the case. Thompson is not a safe pick. He was a pick coveted because of his size, and what that means to his potential. But he has yet to prove anything. That is far from safe.

Then he is being compared to MacEachern who hasn't even been mentioned yet in this poll because he doesn't deserve to be mentioned yet. He is at best a 3rd liner. Thompson is very much in line with that projection. Sometimes good players go to bad college programs. Other times, decent players go to bad college programs because they have no choice. Thompson went to a bad program because he had no other choice. Then he hit a growth spurt and it helped him succeed in that program. But all his other skills are still the "meh" skill that didn't allow him to go anywhere better.

I do agree that he is one of our better forward prospects (not 3rd best though, 4th or 5th). But that speaks to how horrible our forward prospects are more than any skill from Thompson.

I am going to call BS on this. He isn't really comparable to MacEachern. Lets lay out some simple facts. You don't like the pick fine, but lets actually look at some statistics when trying to compare two players.

First MacEachern, the year AFTER he was drafted had to play in the USHL. MacEachern at 21 - his JR season - put up 30 points in 37 games which was his best season. HE HAS NEVER, in his career, been a point per game player. His first year at MSU - he put up less total points then TT put up goals. AND HE was a full 2 years older.

Comparing them, outside of maybe size - which TT has on him by 3 inches, isn't fair to MacEachern. It is a bad comparison and a lazy one. Stating his upside is 3rd line, well that is more then a reach.

Saying TT didn't have other offers and could only play for a bad program. You don't know what was offered. Most kids play in the USHL at his age. . Having said that, I also would have gone with the program that gave me time to play against the best competition available - which he did AT 17 - he turned 18 as the season began. Sorry, that is impressive.

He started on the forth line and worked up to the 1st line.

He may be in a young program - but he still PLAYS AGAINST the Hockey East Teams. BC, BU, ND, Providence - yes those are the big boys and he went toe to toe with them. They finished 7th out of 12. Not great, but considering age of the team (5th youngest in NCAA) that is pretty solid.

Wondering if he will produce goals outside of the PP is fair and a valid concern. Pissing on what he has done or BSing his upside isn't.

 

[EastonBlues22]

New poll is up.