Who is a better prospect source-ISS-Redline- or Central scouting?

Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by borro, Mar 19, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. borro

    borro Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    I.T. Helpdesk
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    If you have a reason why please say so. If you have a bias, say that too!
     
  2. Kaizer

    Kaizer Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Moscow , Russia
    Did Redline have Chistov over Kovalchuk and A. Kostitsyn at #4 at their predraft rankings ?
     
  3. Blind Gardien

    Blind Gardien nexus of the crisis

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    20,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Space Goat
    Location:
    Four Winds Bar
    I've never looked at the full ISS ratings, just their publicized top ones. But generally speaking, I would say all the ratings you find will be hit or miss. That's scouting. You see it with the draft records of NHL teams, you see it with posts here, and the same goes for all the draft publications. They have guys they're high on which sometimes end up looking like bombs, sometimes like brilliant picks. And vice versa. I'd say the best thing is just to read as many different sources as possible and factor them all in. And compare them to your own observations on any prospects you've seen yourself to get a better idea of which agree with your own style best.

    Personally, I think that (as a sweeping generalization), Central Scouting tends to rank with more of an eye to NHL potential, a more traditionalist approach of scouting, where size, physical ability, etc sometimes trump pure skill or intangible instincts. Whereas Redline is more willing to give props to the smaller skilled player, and take flyers on some guys whose whole seems to be greater than the sum of their physical parts. Again, sweeping generalization, but that sort of approach tends to make Redline more "fun" to read, and maybe better at indicating "hockey talent", which is not necessarily the same as indicating "NHL potential".

    I generally find that I like The Hockey News best for a quick and shallow overview of the top-60ish, probably because they get as much from their ear-to-the-NHL-scouting-ground as from any observations they make themselves, whereas the other publications try to go it alone on their own observations. But for more detailed info... a blend of them all spiced with your own preferences and observations is ideal.
    :dunno:
     
  4. VOB

    VOB Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Michigan
    Home Page:
    Scouting has often been referred to by many as an inexact science. You can look at all the parts, throw them into a formula and come out with a solution that best describes a certain player, but of course reality is far different and it is impossible to judge with any type of certainty how a player will pan out.

    In terms of resources, however, CSB leads the pack by a country mile. They have a very professional cadre of top quality scouts augmented by legions of "associates" who scour the globe, offering full detailed reports based on multiple viewings. ISS and RedLine do a good job but just cannot match what CSB has.
     
  5. borro

    borro Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    I.T. Helpdesk
    Location:
    Texas
    Home Page:
    Thanks! I see advantages to all. i would be lying if I said I knew where any of the stuff came from. The CSB seems pretty good at the predraft order. ISS tends to "highlight" guys well. Don't know that much about Redline.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"