yogintheaveragebears
Registered User
- May 23, 2015
- 575
- 245
But in all seriousness, I feel that I can honestly say that I don't dislike Sanford - he's just not nearly as good as the rest of the top 10, imo. Kostin oozes skill, and I would have drafted him at 27. Thompson is a good prospect, but he's not as good as the top 5, imo.
There is a lot of unnecessary back and forth in this thread (and the prior ones) about why one poster rated a particular prospect ahead of another. We could avoid a lot of this by simply acknowledging that everyone has a little different criteria for how we rank them, and that differing opinions is what advances discussions. The disagreements have been civil thus far, but they are becoming more frequent which leads me to believe that might not last much longer. Let's please just enjoy the fact that we have a lot of really nice prospects that will keep us entertained as Blues fans for the foreseeable future.
It's the offseason, wth else are we supposed to do??
But that's the thing...why isn't Sanford 'as good' as the rest of the top-10? He's actually skated in the NHL and didn't look over-whelmed...after putting up very good stats in college and the AHL. Sure, he needs to get stronger but he's on the cusp of actually being an NHL'er. Guys like Kyrou, Thomas and Kostin are being projected to develop linearly so in 2-3 years they'll end up better than Sanford is (or will be), but that's not always how development works. Some guys peak at 17...others can't get over the AHL-hump (Rattie anyone?).
The surprising thing would be if Thompson, Kyrou, Thomas, Kostin & Barbashev ALL became NHL'ers and ALL surpassed Sanford, because the chances are pretty decent that at least one, if not more, of those guys are going to get tripped up somewhere along the way. Saying so-and-so has a high floor isn't really true. The worst they could become is exactly what they are now: a very good amateur player. The only high-floor guys I see are Barbashev, Schmaltz and Sanford because they appear to have successfully navigated the development process and can contribute now, albeit in a limited capacity barring more growth. The rest of the guys are even bigger question marks, and not necessarily destined to become anything more than footnotes in a media guide along with Palushaj, Ponich, Junland, Wannstrom, Hjalmarsson, Soderberg, etc.
I don't see 'stud, top-line forward' when I look at Thompson, or Thomas or even Kostin. Maybe, if things break perfectly they can become 2nd liners in the NHL...but if I had to choose between Kostin or Sanford actually becoming that...I'd probably pick Sanford as things appear today.
There is a lot of unnecessary back and forth in this thread (and the prior ones) about why one poster rated a particular prospect ahead of another. We could avoid a lot of this by simply acknowledging that everyone has a little different criteria for how we rank them, and that differing opinions is what advances discussions. The disagreements have been civil thus far, but they are becoming more frequent which leads me to believe that might not last much longer. Let's please just enjoy the fact that we have a lot of really nice prospects that will keep us entertained as Blues fans for the foreseeable future.
Voted for Thomas though I acknowledge possible recency bias
Why isn't Lindbohm rated more highly than Dunn? Lindbohm has skated in the NHL, and looked serviceable. He'd probably be a 3rd pairing on another team. Dunn hasn't proven anything and may just be a foot-note. Why isn't Jaskin more highly rated than Kostin? One has 190 games in the NHL and one has never played in North America. Why aren't you beating the drums for Sundqvist? Sundqvist has almost as much NHL ice-time as Bradford and a better AHL ppg last year.
And if you didn't think Bradford looked overwhelmed in the NHL, you weren't watching him outside of a few highlights. Without the puck, totally lost. In ANY board battle or semi-physical event, totally overwhelmed. On defense, lost. He has decent to good hands, decent vision, and spotty creativity. But otherwise, he's very very meh.
I saw that Thomas was in Morty's Tier 2.
NOPE.
You could absolutely argue that Thomas or Sanford or some other guy from Tier 2 actually belongs in Tier 1, and vice versa.
Sundqvist, Lindbohm and Jaskin have very limited upside. I think it's safe to say that Thompson's and Stamford's upside is pretty close to the same - 2nd line winger/center. Also, Dunn has outperformed Lindbohm in the AHL, so that's a tough position to push (Lindbohm > Dunn). While Bramford's contributions in the NHL were limited, he didn't look any worse than many kids getting their first taste of NHL action. He was very obviously learning on the job, and out of position...and easily over-powered...but that doesn't make him any less of a prospect than any other forward who would likely look the same, if not more overwhelmed, if given those minutes that Sanforth earned last year.
It bothers me because of the direct implication that the people who hold those (different) opinions aren't capable of having (relatively) objective thoughts or feelings about prospects...certainly nothing that seems to be worth entertaining or discussing on its own merits.
Much easier to simply dismiss it all as the product of some bias or another than to engage those who disagree in honest discussion, or to simply agree to disagree.
I think he's in the top 10, though towards the bottom.But that's the thing...why isn't Sanford 'as good' as the rest of the top-10?
<snip>
I think he's in the top 10, though towards the bottom.
My biggest issue with guys like Sanford is that his only real hope of being a top 6 player rests on him becoming a lot stronger and adapting to play a game that effectively leverages his size. He simply doesn't have the sort of skating, skill, or shot that will let him be a productive top 6 player without that ability.
The first half of that hurdle is relatively easy. He's still young and he has the frame, to it simply boils down to desire, knowledge, and work ethic. The second half is the problem for me. He simply doesn't have those tendencies/instincts in his game right now. He essentially needs to relearn how he plays the game, which is way harder to do than it sounds.
I think it's unlikely to happen, so I'm not very high on his upside. As he stands now, he can still be an effective 3rd liner anyway if he fills out a bit and refines his current game. I think that's a reasonable projection, and there's value in that.
There's a difference between skating not being a weakness, and it being a strength that he can use to create offense. His skating is not an issue, but it's not a weapon, either. He's not out there generating offense with his short area quickness, agility, or top end speed.You're not the first person I've seen say this and.... it's like we're watching two different players. His skating is not an issue at all for me, and will continue to improve as he adds strength. His skill, right now, is about all he has, because he's definitely not going through people at the moment. And his shot, unless you're talking about him going golfing from the blue line like Parayko does, in which case of course he doesn't have that kind of shot, is terrific. His hands in close are terrific, and he's able to roof shots in a blink of an eye.
He's like Thompson in that his game isn't built around his size, it's built around his skill. They weren't big when they learned their skill games, and now that they've got the frames, they need to put muscle on it. You are expecting that, in order for Sanford to be successful, he'll have to become more like Jaskin or Berglund, and basically just play based on his size. Just use the size to grind. I don't see that happening at all, you're absolutely right. Adding size/strength for Sanford will never be about that. It will be about holding off the backcheck and staying on his skates long enough to let the skill take over. Absorb some hits, and then break towards the net, deke, and roof it. That's not "relearning" his game, it's complementing it with something that you've admitted won't be that hard to do. His hockey IQ is absolutely there already, his body just can't do the things his mind can, not because he can't pull it off, but because he's getting knocked down before he can.
Idk, it's not important to me that you change your mind about it. But there are different viewpoints about it.
Barbashev is a nice prospect but having him over Thompson, Thomas, Kyrou, or Husso is crazy to me.