Prospect Info: Who do you rank as the Penguins #18 Prospect?
- Thread starter Randy Butternubs
- Start date
- Status
Tasty Biscuits
with fancy sauce
Glover was born in England. Which means, A) definitely vote for him, and B) definitely not gonna make it.
Serious question: do we even have 18 actual prospects?
Back to voting for Ty Glover. Intrigued by his size and the talk of him being the guy who improved most at WBS last year.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 24,518
- 23,133
I'm not convinced this team has 5 actual, notable prospects tbh.
stardog
Been on HF so long my Myspace link is part of my p
Same answer as I'd have given for roughly the last 4 or 5 prospects. At #18 I choose someone who we haven't drafted/traded for/isn't even in the organization yet due to the fact that at some recent point on this list, you can't even call these guys prospects as they have literally no chance or upside.
And people like to blame that solely on the trading out high draft picks for immediate talent during the Geno era (I get tired of hearing it as the Crosby era over and over).
Sure, that's a big piece of the pie, but just as damaging has been the decade of both a ridiculous, safe, vanilla philosophy pertaining to our scouting/scouts/drafting as well as a fear of taking a big swing at a talented player with high upside, choosing instead to again draft another one of the same exact player for their intangibles, that we've wasted picks on for over a decade.
These are professional scouts who collectively have amassed decades worth of experience in the game which makes me wonder if in all that time if any of them have ever seen a player become successful in the NHL on intangibles alone. Or with high intangibles being able to overcome mediocre skill combined with below average upside.
The answer is so obvious because of it's logic that you don't even need to be a scout or an expert. Even the casual fan would see the flaw in such a design. So if, with their decades of experience, players they've scouted and then players whom their organization ended up drafting, none of them have ever had or seen a single player overcome whatever he lacks to become a successful player in the NHL because of his intangibles, why do they continue to follow the same philosophy, draft the same type, the same exact player over and over again? Why do they grade them based on a system giving the highest weight of importance to something that won't ever, hasn't ever been the reason for a successful pick becoming a NHL player?
Sure, the odds are highly stacked against a draft pick having an NHL career. Even moreso with each decreasing round, which is primarily where the Pens have the majority of their picks. And to find an impact player, or a successful, legit top 6 player in these later rounds becomes even more difficult.
However small those odds are, they are still better than a 0% chance. And if you never even attempt to draft a player who might remotely have a chance to become that player based on his skillet as a teenager then a 0% chance is what you have.
And I don't fault them for not finding that diamond in the rough because I get how difficult it is to successfully uncover such a player.
I do fault them for lacking the attempts. For almost always going with the "safe" choice instead. For the years of "safe" choices being wasted picks as what they consider "safe" (or 2 way, or defensive specialist etc) has had just as high, or even a higher rate of failure than taking a swing. For not drafting even one single player who has become a regular player for the Penguins (even if only a 4th line guy) in almost 10 years worth of drafting that includes a total of 42 players during that apan. For a philosophy so flawed that since 2015 only 2 players drafted by the Penguins are regular players. Both of which were drafted in the 2nd round and both of which play for another team. For despite such a massive and unacceptable failure happening for such a ridiculous number of years, continuing with this same pattern and failing to see that the problem is the philosophy will always lead to the pick being a failure when he is chosen based off that "safe" way which has produced most Pens draft picks over the past decade. For continuing to place prominence when evaluating or scouting on areas which have never been a necessity for becoming an NHL regular. Especially when it comes at the expense of a player obviously lacking in the skill that is necessary to play in the league someday. For hoping that these unnecessary intangibles are so great that they just might one day be enough to overcome the things needed to make it that the player has always lacked. For continuing this process despite the glaring flaws, overwhelming evidence of it's failures and ithe years worth of evidence without being able to produce proof of success even if moderate.
And finally I blame them for accepting and continuing the philosophy and evaluation hierarch that has for a decade proven to be so flawed and a massive failure that they then choose players who are so lacking in so many areas that not only do they have no realistic chance of ever making an NhL roster, they've drafted so poorly that during the same timeframe, these players drafted by the Penguins are so not pro material that they haven't even made a dent in the organizations AHL team. They've in fact, for the most part, only impacted the Baby Pens in a negative way as they team has continued to digress for years as our draft picks join the team (or fail to even make the roster) then over the course of 3 years many of these players fail to see improvement, often lacking the skill needed for such, and almost all of them become AHL flameouts. Only one drafted gorward that I can think of has actually made an impact on the Baby Pens and shown the improvement, skill and impact needed for NHL potential. The Puuse. I might be forgetting someone but even so, what an entire and major systemic failure in every area and with every person involved in the organization drafting and amateur scouting which eventually became an infestation known as the Baby Pens.
So which is our 18th best prospect? We don't even have but maybe 10 to 12 that fit that criteria... even loosely. The rest have zero chance
And people like to blame that solely on the trading out high draft picks for immediate talent during the Geno era (I get tired of hearing it as the Crosby era over and over).
Sure, that's a big piece of the pie, but just as damaging has been the decade of both a ridiculous, safe, vanilla philosophy pertaining to our scouting/scouts/drafting as well as a fear of taking a big swing at a talented player with high upside, choosing instead to again draft another one of the same exact player for their intangibles, that we've wasted picks on for over a decade.
These are professional scouts who collectively have amassed decades worth of experience in the game which makes me wonder if in all that time if any of them have ever seen a player become successful in the NHL on intangibles alone. Or with high intangibles being able to overcome mediocre skill combined with below average upside.
The answer is so obvious because of it's logic that you don't even need to be a scout or an expert. Even the casual fan would see the flaw in such a design. So if, with their decades of experience, players they've scouted and then players whom their organization ended up drafting, none of them have ever had or seen a single player overcome whatever he lacks to become a successful player in the NHL because of his intangibles, why do they continue to follow the same philosophy, draft the same type, the same exact player over and over again? Why do they grade them based on a system giving the highest weight of importance to something that won't ever, hasn't ever been the reason for a successful pick becoming a NHL player?
Sure, the odds are highly stacked against a draft pick having an NHL career. Even moreso with each decreasing round, which is primarily where the Pens have the majority of their picks. And to find an impact player, or a successful, legit top 6 player in these later rounds becomes even more difficult.
However small those odds are, they are still better than a 0% chance. And if you never even attempt to draft a player who might remotely have a chance to become that player based on his skillet as a teenager then a 0% chance is what you have.
And I don't fault them for not finding that diamond in the rough because I get how difficult it is to successfully uncover such a player.
I do fault them for lacking the attempts. For almost always going with the "safe" choice instead. For the years of "safe" choices being wasted picks as what they consider "safe" (or 2 way, or defensive specialist etc) has had just as high, or even a higher rate of failure than taking a swing. For not drafting even one single player who has become a regular player for the Penguins (even if only a 4th line guy) in almost 10 years worth of drafting that includes a total of 42 players during that apan. For a philosophy so flawed that since 2015 only 2 players drafted by the Penguins are regular players. Both of which were drafted in the 2nd round and both of which play for another team. For despite such a massive and unacceptable failure happening for such a ridiculous number of years, continuing with this same pattern and failing to see that the problem is the philosophy will always lead to the pick being a failure when he is chosen based off that "safe" way which has produced most Pens draft picks over the past decade. For continuing to place prominence when evaluating or scouting on areas which have never been a necessity for becoming an NHL regular. Especially when it comes at the expense of a player obviously lacking in the skill that is necessary to play in the league someday. For hoping that these unnecessary intangibles are so great that they just might one day be enough to overcome the things needed to make it that the player has always lacked. For continuing this process despite the glaring flaws, overwhelming evidence of it's failures and ithe years worth of evidence without being able to produce proof of success even if moderate.
And finally I blame them for accepting and continuing the philosophy and evaluation hierarch that has for a decade proven to be so flawed and a massive failure that they then choose players who are so lacking in so many areas that not only do they have no realistic chance of ever making an NhL roster, they've drafted so poorly that during the same timeframe, these players drafted by the Penguins are so not pro material that they haven't even made a dent in the organizations AHL team. They've in fact, for the most part, only impacted the Baby Pens in a negative way as they team has continued to digress for years as our draft picks join the team (or fail to even make the roster) then over the course of 3 years many of these players fail to see improvement, often lacking the skill needed for such, and almost all of them become AHL flameouts. Only one drafted gorward that I can think of has actually made an impact on the Baby Pens and shown the improvement, skill and impact needed for NHL potential. The Puuse. I might be forgetting someone but even so, what an entire and major systemic failure in every area and with every person involved in the organization drafting and amateur scouting which eventually became an infestation known as the Baby Pens.
So which is our 18th best prospect? We don't even have but maybe 10 to 12 that fit that criteria... even loosely. The rest have zero chance
KrisLetAngry
MrJukeBoy
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 5 - Cape Breton Eagles @ Baie-Comeau Drakkar - Baie-Comeau Drakkar leads series 3-1Wagers: 3Staked: $225.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 3 Rochester Americans @ Syracuse Crunch - Series tied 1-1Wagers: 5Staked: $1,285.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
