The Athletic - 2018/19 NHL Farm system rankings

[boredmale]

Is Pronman doing these? I am surprised the Islanders haven't been ranked yet(I would expect roughly 10th) but if Pronman is doing this I do believe he was high on Wilde(16) and Iskhakov(17) which could factor into his ranking. Ironically both were rated higher by him then Dobson(20) who I personally would consider Islanders crown jewel of prospects

 

[sharks9]

didn't read the article, don't follow Pronman, but I'd be shocked if the Habs have a top 15 prospect pool unless you value depth over high end skill cause there just isn't much high end skill.

Look at the teams in the bottom 15. Where’s their high end skill?

 

[Isaac Nootin]

Look at the teams in the bottom 15. Where’s their high end skill?

Tolvanen? Kaprizov? Makar?

 

[Mrb1p]

Tolvanen? Kaprizov? Makar?

True and after that?

 

[Isaac Nootin]

True and after that?

He asked where the high end talent was, I listed names. How is that hard to understand?

 

[Mrb1p]

He asked where the high end talent was, I listed names. How is that hard to understand?

So you listed three players.... on three different teams...

Wheres their Ylonen? Wheres their Poehling? Wheres their Juulsen? That counts as high end.

 

[Isaac Nootin]

So you listed three players.... on three different teams...

Wheres their Ylonen? Wheres their Poehling? Wheres their Juulsen? That counts as high end.

Makar, Kaut, Timmins, Bowers. Happy?

Why are you constantly looking for arguments?

 

[Mrb1p]

Makar, Kaut, Timmins, Bowers. Happy?

Why are you constantly looking for arguments?

Yeah, Colorado should have been top 5, no surprise there.

 

[firstemperor]

Habs fans are notoriously pessimistic

That's true for a lot of the bigger fanbases - not an absolute, of course. And the other part is polls on here are worthless if your a fan of a massive, polarizing fanbase.

As for the Habs being #6 on this list- I disagree but it's just one person's opinion- i.e. Pronman. It has no substantial effect beyond that one opinion.

To be fair, Pronman was high on some of the later Hab picks (McShane, Hillis)- which I wasn't a huge fan of, in particular- before the Habs chose them. A lot of stock being put on this draft....if that was the case, I would have still put NYI, Detroit, Florida (Florida is more debatable) over the Habs pool, at the very least.

NYI picked up 1 elite and 1 high-end prospect in this draft for me (Dobson, Wahlstrom, respectively) and Ishakov and Wilde (two boom-bust guys with a high ceiling) are two guys I was high on as flyers in the 2nd.

Detroit with Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, McIssac, Regula with their first (first 3 rounds) selections were incredible for me. McIssac, Regula are perfect flyers in those rounds and I was high on both entering (I wanted my team to get in on Regula in particular). Zadina, Veleno, Berggren provide excellent value in their slots, even if the latter have some risk attached.

Florida is more debatable. I really liked their draft this year as well, and Borgstrom is an elite prospect for me. I liked Denisenko a lot entering as BPA and Noel was excellent value at his slot- but they didn't have the volume of picks that the Habs had this year.

Detroit being 1 slot off, NYI being ahead.....it's not that much of a travesty if you look at it that way.

So you listed three players.... on three different teams...

Wheres their Ylonen? Wheres their Poehling? Wheres their Juulsen? That counts as high end.

Ylonen and Poehling might be high-end by Pronman's definition. But definitions aside, I wouldn't consider Juulsen high-end, he's a prospect that's not worth the slot he was taken in, in pure value anymore IMO. He's one of those guys where the Habs may not like a ~mid-2nd for, but where another team wouldn't offer more, at the same time.

 

[Dbrownss]

Tolvanen? Kaprizov? Makar?

None of those guys were considered elite, and unless a team has multiple high end guys, they didn't rank high.



Kotka and Ylonen is what vaulted Montreal up to 6

 

[Mrb1p]

That's true for a lot of the bigger fanbases - not an absolute, of course. And the other part is polls on here are worthless if your a fan of a massive, polarizing fanbase.

As for the Habs being #6 on this list- I disagree but it's just one person's opinion- i.e. Pronman. It has no substantial effect beyond that one opinion.

To be fair, Pronman was high on some of the later Hab picks (McShane, Hillis)- which I wasn't a huge fan of, in particular- before the Habs chose them. A lot of stock being put on this draft....if that was the case, I would have still put NYI, Detroit, Florida (Florida is more debatable) over the Habs pool, at the very least.

NYI picked up 1 elite and 1 high-end prospect in this draft for me (Dobson, Wahlstrom, respectively) and Ishakov and Wilde (two boom-bust guys with a high ceiling) are two guys I was high on as flyers in the 2nd.

Detroit with Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, McIssac, Regula with their first (first 3 rounds) selections were incredible for me. McIssac, Regula are perfect flyers in those rounds and I was high on both entering (I wanted my team to get in on Regula in particular). Zadina, Veleno, Berggren provide excellent value in their slots, even if the latter have some risk attached.

Florida is more debatable. I really liked their draft this year as well, and Borgstrom is an elite prospect for me. I liked Denisenko a lot entering as BPA and Noel was excellent value at his slot- but they didn't have the volume of picks that the Habs had this year.

Detroit being 1 slot off, NYI being ahead.....it's not that much of a travesty if you look at it that way.



Ylonen and Poehling might be high-end by Pronman's definition. But definitions aside, I wouldn't consider Juulsen high-end, he's a prospect that's not worth the slot he was taken in, in pure value anymore IMO. He's one of those guys where the Habs may not like a ~mid-2nd for, but where another team wouldn't offer more, at the same time.

Teams rarely offer up a 1st rounder for a prospect. A top 4 D is always worth a pick qt the 25th spot, you not being informed about the player doesnt prove much, except that hes ridiculously underrated.

 

[firstemperor]

Teams rarely offer up a 1st rounder for a prospect. A top 4 D is always worth a pick qt the 25th spot, you not being informed about the player doesnt prove much, except that hes ridiculously underrated.

Teams rarely offer up a 1st for a prospect= True, I don't know how this is relevant to what I said though. Not only do I agree with this, as a team who drafts a prospect is clearly invested in them long-term to begin with, but I think it actually supports my argument.

Top 4D always worth a pick at minimum, at the 25th spot= True

Until Juulsen proves he is a top 4D though, the 2nd point is fruitless. There are prospects scattered throughout the draft you can classify as having top4 potential.

Only difference is Juulsen will be in his D+4 this upcoming year.

You can call me misinformed if you like but I don't feel Juulsen is worth his slot in a vacuum, in trade value.

 

[Isaac Nootin]

None of those guys were considered elite

According to who?

Regardless, please follow the quote chain and tell me what's wrong with what I stated.

 

[Mrb1p]

Teams rarely offer up a 1st for a prospect= True, I don't know how this is relevant to what I said though. Not only do I agree with this, as a team who drafts a prospect is clearly invested in them long-term to begin with, but I think it actually supports my argument.

Top 4D always worth a pick at minimum, at the 25th spot= True

Until Juulsen proves he is a top 4D though, the 2nd point is fruitless. There are prospects scattered throughout the draft you can classify as having top4 potential.

Only difference is Juulsen will be in his D+4 this upcoming year.

You can call me misinformed if you like but I don't feel Juulsen is worth his slot in a vacuum, in trade value.

Hamonic, whos a D that can be compared to Juulsens realistic projections went for what again?

How often do 25th overall D make the NHL in their D1 year? D2? D3?

Players that are not worth a first rounder as per that definition
Phillipe Myers
Ryan Donato
Nikita Scherback
Travis Sanheim
Strome
Gurianov
Zboril
Travis Dermott
Daniel Sprong
Jordan Greenway
Kaprizov
Rasmus Andersson

Aight, d4 prospects and d5 prospects, obvious busts.

 

[Mrb1p]

According to who?

Regardless, please follow the quote chain and tell me what's wrong with what I stated.

Pronman

 

[firstemperor]

Hamonic, whos a D that can be compared to Juulsens realistic projections went for what again?

How often do 25th overall D make the NHL in their D1 year? D2? D3?

Players that are not worth a first rounder as per that definition
Phillipe Myers
Ryan Donato
Nikita Scherback
Travis Sanheim
Strome
Gurianov
Zboril
Travis Dermott
Daniel Sprong
Jordan Greenway
Kaprizov
Rasmus Andersson

Aight, d4 prospects and d5 prospects, obvious busts.

Your taking the hit rate of a 25th or later drafted overall prospect past their D+3 and equating that to an absolute- which is a fallacy in itself. To answer your question No, prospects that are drafted 25th overall or later are not worthless, nor are they necessarily worthless if aren't NHL regulars in their D+4 or onwards.

But the odds of a prospect being a top 4D, with those considerations in mind, does decrease significantly in odds as those two considerations hold true.

A bunch of players on your list easily have 1st+ value or more. I'm not going to bother to debate otherwise as I strongly agree.

What I said has more to do with Juulsen, then some absolute narrative you've construed.

As for comparing Hamonic for Juulsen- let's wait until Juulsen hits that level of productivity at the end-goal (NHL) before we equate trajectories. If we were optimistic about every prospects trajectories, everyone would live up their potential in some linear fashion.

You've seem to convince yourself that because Juulsen is progressing (slow or not), he has made himself considerably more valuable. If you look at any prospect in the 1st, progression leans towards the norm- but the hit rate of prospects becoming anything is certainly a lot less then that as an objective, quantifiable measure.

 

[joe dirte]

Hamonic, whos a D that can be compared to Juulsens realistic projections went for what again?

How often do 25th overall D make the NHL in their D1 year? D2? D3?

Players that are not worth a first rounder as per that definition
Phillipe Myers
Ryan Donato
Nikita Scherback
Travis Sanheim
Strome
Gurianov
Zboril
Travis Dermott
Daniel Sprong
Jordan Greenway
Kaprizov
Rasmus Andersson

Aight, d4 prospects and d5 prospects, obvious busts.

Harmonic doesn't sound like a reasonable projection at all.

 

[ookhaab]

Oh the infefiority complex, keep it coming


A lot of HFBoards users watch the Hlinka, U18 WJC and U20 WJC every year. That alone gives you an idea about a big number of prospects. In fact, another higly respected prospect writer Button seems to be making rankings almost exclusively based on international tournaments. People are really overrating how many games guys like Pronman or Button actually watch. They are not scouts, they are writers.

Button used to be a DIRECTOR of scouting deparment for Dallas and even General manager.

But yeah I'm sure he just writes about prospects and doesnt actually know how to evaluate talent or even watch the prospects!

 

[joe dirte]

Your taking the hit rate of a 25th or later drafted overall prospect past their D+3 and equating that to an absolute- which is a fallacy in itself.

A bunch of players on your list easily have 1st+ value or more.

What I said has more to do with Juulsen, then some absolute narrative you've construed.

As for comparing Hamonic for Juulsen- let's wait until Juulsen hits that level of productivity at the end-goal (NHL) before we equate trajectories. If we were optimistic about every prospects trajectories, everyone would live up their potential in some linear fashion.

You've seem to convince yourself that because Juulsen is progressing (slow or not), he has made himself considerably more valuable. If you look at any prospect in the 1st, progression leans towards the norm- but the hit rate of prospects becoming anything is certainly a lot less then that as an objective, quantifiable measure.

Well he didn't really have harmonics level of performance at the junior level either though.

 

[JohnLennon]

Teams rarely offer up a 1st for a prospect= True, I don't know how this is relevant to what I said though. Not only do I agree with this, as a team who drafts a prospect is clearly invested in them long-term to begin with, but I think it actually supports my argument.

Top 4D always worth a pick at minimum, at the 25th spot= True

Until Juulsen proves he is a top 4D though, the 2nd point is fruitless. There are prospects scattered throughout the draft you can classify as having top4 potential.

Only difference is Juulsen will be in his D+4 this upcoming year.

You can call me misinformed if you like but I don't feel Juulsen is worth his slot in a vacuum, in trade value.

I have to disagree with you there. While Juulsen hasn't played consistent NHL hockey yet, he has developed well, and had a phenomenal season split between the AHL and NHL last year. He is pretty much a lock to make the NHL next season. His upside is very clearly a top 4 defense, and at this point his floor is a 5-6 defenseman. If you're getting an NHL quality defenseman who is close to becoming a top 4 guy at the 25th pick overall... You take that and run. The odds of even drafting an NHL depth player at that point in the draft is what, 50/50? You do not know Juulsen at all if you genuinely believe that teams wouldn't offer a late first round pick for him, and I guarantee the Habs would not move him for that.

No one is claiming Juulsen is elite, but he's certainly a top defense prospect in the league who has been somewhat overlooked by fans of other teams due to him missing lots of time to injury. He's legit. I expect him to have an impressive rookie season this year.

 

[firstemperor]

I have to disagree with you there. While Juulsen hasn't played consistent NHL hockey yet, he has developed well, and had a phenomenal season split between the AHL and NHL last year. He is pretty much a lock to make the NHL next season. His upside is very clearly a top 4 defense, and at this point his floor is a 5-6 defenseman. If you're getting an NHL quality defenseman who is close to becoming a top 4 guy at the 25th pick overall... You take that and run. The odds of even drafting an NHL depth player at that point in the draft is what, 50/50? You do not know Juulsen at all if you genuinely believe that teams wouldn't offer a late first round pick for him, and I guarantee the Habs would not move him for that.

No one is claiming Juulsen is elite, but he's certainly a top defense prospect in the league who has been somewhat overlooked by fans of other teams due to him missing lots of time to injury. He's legit. I expect him to have an impressive rookie season this year.

I can buy the top4 D upside narrative but disagree with most of what you said otherwise including the point that teams would be willing to offer their 1st (late or not) for him.

I think your overly optimistic, every player taken in any draft can be sold as a guy who can be a top 4 NHL defender, at some point. Not to be insulting, but everything you just said could be said about Tinordi, or Percy/Finn for the Leafs, for the most part.

As for taking a depth player? (bottom-pairing depth player) at #25 is not what your expectation is when your drafting someone with a 1st rounder though. Sure, the hit-rate of getting a depth NHL player with a 1st is inherently low but that's why people value draft picks- their expectation is they can get something better.

So in that sense, no, you don't "take that and run"- my take on that. I wouldn't take a late pick tracking to be a bottom pairing depth player in any scenario, I would take the shot at the late 1st round pick, every single time, in every subsequent draft year.

 

[Thrasymachus]

Well he didn't really have harmonics level of performance at the junior level either though.

Islander fans knew well before Hamonic made the NHL that he was special

 

[RedWingzz]

Button used to be a DIRECTOR of scouting deparment for Dallas and even General manager.

But yeah I'm sure he just writes about prospects and doesnt actually know how to evaluate talent or even watch the prospects!

People like to hate on Button for some reason. Button is a credible source for information when it comes to all things hockey. He knows his stuff. Button gets a bit of the Pierre McGuire treatment, in that fans like to knock them because of their personalities, but there is no denying both Button and McGuire are hockey encyclopedias.

 

[JohnLennon]

I can buy the top4 D upside narrative but disagree with most of what you said otherwise including the point that teams would be willing to offer their 1st (late or not) for him.

I think your overly optimistic, every player taken in any draft can be sold as a guy who can be a top 4 NHL defender, at some point. Not to be insulting, but everything you just said could be said about Tinordi, or Percy/Finn for the Leafs, for the most part.

As for taking a depth player? (bottom-pairing depth player) at #25 is not what your expectation is when your drafting someone with a 1st rounder though. Sure, the hit-rate of getting a depth NHL player with a 1st is inherently low but that's why people value draft picks- their expectation is they can get something better.

So in that sense, no, you don't "take that and run"- my take on that. I wouldn't take a late pick tracking to be a bottom pairing depth player in any scenario, I would take the shot at the late 1st round pick, every single time, in every subsequent draft year.

Well yes you can say many defenders have top 4 upside when they're drafted. The difference is the likelihood they achieve that. Juulsen is currently very close to achieving that upside due to successful development, whereas Tinordi and the other guys you mentioned never really ever got close to their potential.

Also, obviously everyone is drafting hoping that player becomes an impact player. You can apply that to literally every pick in the draft, not just first rounders. But I'm telling you, the chances the player you picked becoming a meaningful player in the NHL is not very high when you're drafting in the region Juulsen was picked.

Juulsen isn't tracking to be a bottom pairing depth guy in the long run - that's why I think you don't actually know the prospect very well. He's tracking to be a second pairing defender who plays tough minutes and with a touch of offensive upside. He still has potential to keep developing. Comparing him to the likes of Tinordi due to the perceived upside they had on draft day is not applicable in this scenario considering where Juulsen is at in his career.

When you have teams trading second round picks for Nathan Beaulieu or Roman Polak, you're kidding yourself if you genuinely believe that teams wouldn't offer more to get a guy like Juulsen. Just my opinion, but I really think this season will make people such as yourself realize he's the real deal. We'll see!

 

[Deficient Mode]

Juulsen is actually pretty good in the offensive zone. He doesn't create much offense in transition like most point-producing defensemen do, though.