Prospect Info: 17-18 Blues Top Prospect #5

[RandallRitchey]

Husso, again.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Yea, 3 years is huge at that age. Why aren't we comparing what 25 year old Agostino did in the AHL to Ranford? Clearly if comparing AHL points is all that matters, Agostino has much more upside than Sandy Ford.

Rattie too. He scored 30 goals in the AHL one year, and obviously with all of the Rocket Richard trophies he's gotten since then, the correlation with NHL scoring and performance is strong and clear. Schwartz also only had 19 points in 33 games with Peoria back in the day. Backes only got 23 in 43 games. Both are duds in the NHL now.

It's just science breh

 

[KirkOut]

Voted for Thomas though I acknowledge possible recency bias

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

I mean, I think Sanford and Barbashev are more closer in reality than they are in our standings.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

I know this is probably opening a can of worms, but is it possible that people are still "down" on Thompson because they're upset that he's all that we have left from the Oshie trade? It feels like people were reluctant to praise him last year for that, potentially putting a bitter taste in their mouths because they always felt like they had to talk about Thompson in the context of Brouwer and Oshie. When he opened a lot of eyes and got high praise during the WJCs, I think a lot of people here were very surprised by that bc they had spent so much time hating on him and convincing themselves that he was something he wasn't.

Idk, in general, I get the shiny toy syndrome with Kostin, I get that people like the upsides of Walman and Dunn, and that Husso still is a lot of people's shining light of hope in the darkness of Allen's slump last year, but Thompson doesn't get nearly the amount of love that I think he deserves around here. He's a very good prospect, and imo, he's probably got a better chance of sticking than just about anybody else, even if it's just in an Austin Watson-type role.

Anyways, just wanted to float that and see if anyone would admit to it haha. Seems like a very similar situation to the low valuation of Sanford; people don't like him because they didn't like the Shattenkirk trade. Doesn't really have anything to do with what he is or isn't capable of, it's about the trade. Inversely, Kostin is valued very highly because he was the result of the Reaves trade, which is currently seen as a win for us. Just a thought.

 

[STL fan in MN]

My understanding is that Thompson was injured late in the WJC. So that would seem to explain why he didn't play much the last couple of games. That said, while I like him and see him as a quality late bloomer, I don't think I'm as high on him as some others. He's still really raw and needs to put a lot together still IMO. But I also think he has a good shot of doing so. I project him more as a 3rd to 2nd line RW but maybe he can handle C. This season will tell.

I liked what I saw from Sanford. He's got the string bean thing going on too...which is perhaps a bit more of a concern for him since he's 22, going on 23 whereas Thompson is 19, going on 20. But he displayed soft hands and pretty good positioning and awareness. I can see why he has the reputation of a guy coaches can trust. But it is a little hard to gauge some of these guys coming into the org in comparison to guys that have been in the org 2-4 years already. It's probably correct that Sanford and Sundqvist will likely be a bit underrated simply due to unfamiliarity. I personally have them 9th and 11th respectively, which I sense may be a bit higher than some have them, but also perhaps a little lower than they should be/where I'd rank them if I had seen more of them.

I agree with the sentiment that the guys in this range are all really close so it really wouldn't take much for someone I have ranked 8th or 9th to move up to 3rd/4th fairly easily.

 

[Shwabeal]

I know this is probably opening a can of worms, but is it possible that people are still "down" on Thompson because they're upset that he's all that we have left from the Oshie trade? It feels like people were reluctant to praise him last year for that, potentially putting a bitter taste in their mouths because they always felt like they had to talk about Thompson in the context of Brouwer and Oshie. When he opened a lot of eyes and got high praise during the WJCs, I think a lot of people here were very surprised by that bc they had spent so much time hating on him and convincing themselves that he was something he wasn't.

Idk, in general, I get the shiny toy syndrome with Kostin, I get that people like the upsides of Walman and Dunn, and that Husso still is a lot of people's shining light of hope in the darkness of Allen's slump last year, but Thompson doesn't get nearly the amount of love that I think he deserves around here. He's a very good prospect, and imo, he's probably got a better chance of sticking than just about anybody else, even if it's just in an Austin Watson-type role.

Anyways, just wanted to float that and see if anyone would admit to it haha. Seems like a very similar situation to the low valuation of Sanford; people don't like him because they didn't like the Shattenkirk trade. Doesn't really have anything to do with what he is or isn't capable of, it's about the trade. Inversely, Kostin is valued very highly because he was the result of the Reaves trade, which is currently seen as a win for us. Just a thought.

I think that may play a part of it. For me, I have Kostin and Thompson very close in my rankings bunched with a handful of guys and same with Sanford. I think for some people it could be a combination of the trade factor with the perceived difference in ceiling and readiness. I think a lot of people look at Kostin and see someone with a higher ceiling than Thompson or Sanford and also think that he is closer to helping the NHL squad sooner than Thompson which could be true. I doubt anyone is looking at the two (or three if we want to include Sanford) of them and judging their ranking based on the perceived value of the trade each is "attached" to.

 

[STL fan in MN]

I know this is probably opening a can of worms, but is it possible that people are still "down" on Thompson because they're upset that he's all that we have left from the Oshie trade? It feels like people were reluctant to praise him last year for that, potentially putting a bitter taste in their mouths because they always felt like they had to talk about Thompson in the context of Brouwer and Oshie. When he opened a lot of eyes and got high praise during the WJCs, I think a lot of people here were very surprised by that bc they had spent so much time hating on him and convincing themselves that he was something he wasn't.

Idk, in general, I get the shiny toy syndrome with Kostin, I get that people like the upsides of Walman and Dunn, and that Husso still is a lot of people's shining light of hope in the darkness of Allen's slump last year, but Thompson doesn't get nearly the amount of love that I think he deserves around here. He's a very good prospect, and imo, he's probably got a better chance of sticking than just about anybody else, even if it's just in an Austin Watson-type role.

Anyways, just wanted to float that and see if anyone would admit to it haha. Seems like a very similar situation to the low valuation of Sanford; people don't like him because they didn't like the Shattenkirk trade. Doesn't really have anything to do with what he is or isn't capable of, it's about the trade. Inversely, Kostin is valued very highly because he was the result of the Reaves trade, which is currently seen as a win for us. Just a thought.

I had to really dig for how the heck Thompson was connected to the Oshie trade. To move up from 28 to 26 in last year's draft, they used the 3rd rounder they got as part of the Oshie deal. No, I don't hold that against Thompson at all. I mean, I completely forgot about it. Perhaps others feel differently but I've never gotten much of a sense of Thompson being connected to Oshie.

What I do recall is a number of us not really liking the Thompson pick at first. Then he won some people over...and now perhaps some have come down on him a bit again after a lackluster AHL showing.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

I had completely forgotten Thompson was involved in the Oshie deal. I think he's got a lot of time to put in, and while his ceiling is similar to Thomas', he also has a lower floor. He has a lot of tools, but none of them are elite-looking. His shot is the closest thing to one, though. He's a good prospect - there are others that happen to be better.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

I had completely forgotten Thompson was involved in the Oshie deal. I think he's got a lot of time to put in, and while his ceiling is similar to Thomas', he also has a lower floor. He has a lot of tools, but none of them are elite-looking. His shot is the closest thing to one, though. He's a good prospect - there are others that happen to be better.

See, I just don't see how you can look at Thomas and say he's definitively better than Thompson, especially considering the different roles they'll likely play. One's a triggerman, one's a set-up guy; both are areas of need, so I don't buy the position weighting argument. I will say that I've seen Thompson beat significantly more guys 1-on-1 than I've seen Thomas do that. I don't see the "low floor," I guess.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

Thompson's skill set to me says he could be anywhere from a 3rd liner to a 1st liner under specific circumstances. He's a triggerman with size, but doesn't have anything else that is close to elite. Thomas could be anywhere from a mediocre 2C to a 1st liner under specific circumstances. He has great vision, above average speed, good size, and a beautiful pass.

They're both similar in talent-level, but I'd put Thomas above Thompson since I can't see Thomas being anything worse than a mediocre 2C with that vision and pass. Thompson could end up as Patrik Berglund 2.0 but without losing his shot. It's a close call, and I wouldn't value my own opinion over others'.

For me, Kyrou, Thompson, Husso, and Thomas are all fairly even. I'd just rank Thomas higher.

 

[Ranksu]

Wasn't Tage Thompson superstar pick last year (we move up to acquire him), but where has he fallen currently?

 

[David Dennison]

Wasn't Tage Thompson superstar pick last year (we move up to acquire him), but where has he fallen currently?

Yeah, he had a solid season and a good WJC. I would have preferred he stuck at UConn for another year, I think it would have been a better place for him to add strength and play in all situations. Look at the Penguins roster, a ton of those guys stuck in the NCAA for 3-4 years, no need to rush them. I also think he runs the risk of getting buried on a deep team in Chicago, the AHL isnt a forgiving league for 19 year olds.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

I agree about the extra year in UCONN. He needs to bulk up some more and get used to his new size.

Also, just because Thompson is lower doesn't mean he's fallen - we just got two better prospects from this draft. Walman and Dunn have always been better prospects, and Husso is about even with Tage

 

[tfriede2]

Thomas. Husso and Thompson next.

 

[bluemandan]

I know this is probably opening a can of worms, but is it possible that people are still "down" on Thompson because they're upset that he's all that we have left from the Oshie trade? It feels like people were reluctant to praise him last year for that, potentially putting a bitter taste in their mouths because they always felt like they had to talk about Thompson in the context of Brouwer and Oshie. When he opened a lot of eyes and got high praise during the WJCs, I think a lot of people here were very surprised by that bc they had spent so much time hating on him and convincing themselves that he was something he wasn't.

Idk, in general, I get the shiny toy syndrome with Kostin, I get that people like the upsides of Walman and Dunn, and that Husso still is a lot of people's shining light of hope in the darkness of Allen's slump last year, but Thompson doesn't get nearly the amount of love that I think he deserves around here. He's a very good prospect, and imo, he's probably got a better chance of sticking than just about anybody else, even if it's just in an Austin Watson-type role.

Anyways, just wanted to float that and see if anyone would admit to it haha. Seems like a very similar situation to the low valuation of Sanford; people don't like him because they didn't like the Shattenkirk trade. Doesn't really have anything to do with what he is or isn't capable of, it's about the trade. Inversely, Kostin is valued very highly because he was the result of the Reaves trade, which is currently seen as a win for us. Just a thought.

While you might be on to something here, for me it has little to do with that.

It is much more that Sanford and Thompson project to me as more of 'high ceiling, low floor' guys. If we're going by Hockey's Future style ratings, a guy like Thompson would be a 7.0B while a guy like Kostin is an 8.0C. (For those unfamiliar, the number is their upside while the letter grade is the chance of them reaching that upside.)

For me, the higher upside outweighs the likelihood (or not) of reaching that upside.

 

[Itsnotatrap]

If we took an approach like a NCAA poll, and ranked 1-10 and assign points in reverse order, I think it would be really clear that there are razor thin margins between #4 and #10. So I wouldn't make big conclusions on who settles at 9 or 10.

Thompson has a great shot, good hands. He knows it and from what I can tell overrelies on it and goes for the big play too much. That is easily fixable. With some strength added, he could become a real PITA around the net. This is a big year for him IMO. He's still really young. I'm not ready to limit him as safe/low ceiling yet.

 

[Blues0307]

I had to really dig for how the heck Thompson was connected to the Oshie trade. To move up from 28 to 26 in last year's draft, they used the 3rd rounder they got as part of the Oshie deal. No, I don't hold that against Thompson at all. I mean, I completely forgot about it. Perhaps others feel differently but I've never gotten much of a sense of Thompson being connected to Oshie.

What I do recall is a number of us not really liking the Thompson pick at first. Then he won some people over...and now perhaps some have come down on him a bit again after a lackluster AHL showing.

This plays a part I believe. Many started out not liking the pick, so he's kind of had to win over the hardcores in the fanbase. Another thing working against him is he hasn't filled out yet, so it's really hard to project him. He probably needs to put on a good 20 lbs still if not more before he'll be NHL ready. On the plus side, the kid already has a laser of a shot so when he does fill out, it should be that much more impressive.

 

[EastonBlues22]

I know this is probably opening a can of worms, but is it possible that people are still "down" on Thompson because they're upset that he's all that we have left from the Oshie trade? It feels like people were reluctant to praise him last year for that, potentially putting a bitter taste in their mouths because they always felt like they had to talk about Thompson in the context of Brouwer and Oshie. When he opened a lot of eyes and got high praise during the WJCs, I think a lot of people here were very surprised by that bc they had spent so much time hating on him and convincing themselves that he was something he wasn't.

Idk, in general, I get the shiny toy syndrome with Kostin, I get that people like the upsides of Walman and Dunn, and that Husso still is a lot of people's shining light of hope in the darkness of Allen's slump last year, but Thompson doesn't get nearly the amount of love that I think he deserves around here. He's a very good prospect, and imo, he's probably got a better chance of sticking than just about anybody else, even if it's just in an Austin Watson-type role.

Anyways, just wanted to float that and see if anyone would admit to it haha. Seems like a very similar situation to the low valuation of Sanford; people don't like him because they didn't like the Shattenkirk trade. Doesn't really have anything to do with what he is or isn't capable of, it's about the trade. Inversely, Kostin is valued very highly because he was the result of the Reaves trade, which is currently seen as a win for us. Just a thought.

Have you ever noticed that you have this tendency to diminish opinions that differ from your own by chalking them up to being the product of various rationalizations?

 

[EastonBlues22]

I went with Thomas.

Picking between Thompson and Kyrou with my next pick, then between Schmaltz, Sanford, and Husso after those two.

Haven't really seen enough of Sundqvist recently to confidently slot him in. Hard to say I value him more than Sanford or Husso, but he probably has more value than most of the guys outside the top 10.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

Have you ever noticed that you have this tendency to diminish opinions that differ from your own by chalking them up to being the product of various rationalizations?

You're just saying that because you're still bitter over Morty opening a can of worms.

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.

 

[Itsnotatrap]

You're just saying that because you're still bitter over Morty opening a can of worms.

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.

If I have a bias on prospects, it's that I give the benefit of the doubt too often that a prospect will chew away at gaps in age 19, 20, 21 seasons. So I may underestimate a Sanford vs a Thompson, or a Schmaltz type prospect.

 

[HighNote]

Voted Kyrou. It was between him and Husso for me.

 

[Majorityof1]

Leave it to you to completely miss the point.

A better comparison is Barbashev. Similar age to Sanford, and produced basically the same as him in the AHL and NHL.

One is our 2nd best prospect apparently. The other isn't even in the discussion.

If the roles were reversed and we had drafted Sanford and just traded for Barbashev, I'd bet good money the rankings wouldn't currently look like this. And that is what Stealth is saying as well.

I didn't miss the point. He didn't make it effectively. The 3 year age difference from 19 to 22 obviates any similarity in stats. His argument is that there is no reason to prefer Thompson over Ranford, so it must be bias. If A, then B. Disprove A, ie that Thompson putting up those numbers 3 years earlier than Ranford is a reason to prefer him. Then suddenly arguing B is moot. Because A isn't true, so B is irrelevant.

Ranford just isn't a good prospect. This opinion has nothing to do with rationalizing any trade. I watched the Capitals over multiple games before the trade and my thought was "Vrana must be really struggling if this doofus is getting called up before him". I was shocked when he was the prospect we got. He can't stay on his feet. He is clueless without the puck, and he doesn't have any skills I would say are near-elite.

Ranford, during his stint with the Blues, may have put up similar PPG to Barbashev; however, given how bad he was in Washington and how he looked when he wasn't scoring, his production in a Blue note could very well could be due to small sample size. On the other hand, Barbashev looked good even when he was not producing. Barbashev created chances, played physical and played solid defense for a rookie.

I'll trust the eye-test and coaches faith in Barby over the box scores from a 12 game stint. Barbashev played his way from 4th line to top 6 when injuries struck, wheras Ranford was getting his minutes cut or scratched as time wore on. Barbashev was used pretty heavily in the defensive zone wheras Ranford was sheltered. Advanced stats don't pain a very pretty picture for Ranford either. Worst CF% and Corsi Rel on the team, again despite sheltered zone starts. He's just not good, and if we drafted him, I'd think the same.

 

[EastonBlues22]

You're just saying that because you're still bitter over Morty opening a can of worms.

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.

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.