Prospect Info: 2014 Prospect Ranking Poll #3

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I think Karlsson's offensive potential is miles ahead of Rakell. I've said it before, I dont think Rakell has any finish and I think it will prevent him from ever being a legit top 6 center. Maybe I'm wrong. It's fine though because Rakell's defensive game is perfect for a 3rd line guy.

Kerdiles may have similar potential to Karlsson but he hasnt been playing against men like Karlsson has. He gets the edge to me.

I'm not saying that it's wrong to rank him ahead, even if I disagree, but I just think all three are quite similar rankings-wise, and find it odd that Karlsson appears to be an overwhelming favorite of those three, not to mention the others.

Also, I definitely disagree about Rakell's offensive game, I think he'll be fine and really don't see Karlsson being miles ahead of him, even potential-wise. As for Kerdiles, he has been playing against men, even if they aren't as experienced as the ones in Sweden, and deserves some credit there.

Personally, I have Karlsson as the last of the three, and that's not a slight on him at all. Very close, though, IMO.

 

[Exit Dose]

So why is there not a lot of Kerdiles love in the polls?

We're only two spots in. Also, being a similar sort of player doesn't mean the same potential or if you're one of the people voting on where they are right now, that they are at the same spot.

 

[Exit Dose]

I like Karlsson, but there's a definite flavor of the month(year?) vibe for me. Not that he won't be good or anything, but I just don't see how he's favored overwhelmingly over Rakell, and I definitely don't see any difference rankings-wise between him and Kerdiles.

You mean this player that has largely played in Swedish leagues is doing better in the polls after playing in what for most of us is a more visible North American league. Yeah, it's real puzzling. Karlsson was better than Rakell at the WJCs, and he was more effective in Norfolk than Rakell was. That is why most of the people that follow that team have him ahead of Rakell. Maybe things will be different when they are both having to play in the NHL, but as I only have those two things to compare them with, I am going with Karlsson.

 

[snarktacular]

I like Karlsson, but there's a definite flavor of the month(year?) vibe for me. Not that he won't be good or anything, but I just don't see how he's favored overwhelmingly over Rakell, and I definitely don't see any difference rankings-wise between him and Kerdiles.

Norfolk watchers seemed to like Karlsson significantly better than Rakell.

And Karlsson was actually always well ahead of Rakell for me in terms of potential, even when they were drafted. His first SEL year moved him ahead of Rakell for "prospect rankings." So actually there hasn't been any real change in my view of him.

But yeah there has been a shift in terms of the board opinions. IMO he's finally moving up to where he should have been.

I agree that he's similar to Kerdiles. But his competition the past two seasons was better, and he looked a bit better in AHL. So that's why Karlsson gets the nod.

 

[Sojourn]

What snark said.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Norfolk watchers seemed to like Karlsson significantly better than Rakell.

And Karlsson was actually always well ahead of Rakell for me in terms of potential, even when they were drafted. His first SEL year moved him ahead of Rakell for "prospect rankings." So actually there hasn't been any real change in my view of him.

But yeah there has been a shift in terms of the board opinions. IMO he's finally moving up to where he should have been.

I agree that he's similar to Kerdiles. But his competition the past two seasons was better, and he looked a bit better in AHL. So that's why Karlsson gets the nod.

Rakell looked good in the AHL (better than Etem, actually, who supposedly "dominated). Karlsson looked like he didn't belong. I understand it's a fairly small sample, and I wonder if Karlsson is as ready to make the NHL jump as Rakell is, even though I think he's the more talented player. It wouldn't surprise me to see Rakell win a spot over him, but it would surprise me if Rakell ended up the better player.

edit - this one's also surprisingly close right now, so I'll let it go until the poll closes in the morning.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

You mean this player that has largely played in Swedish leagues is doing better in the polls after playing in what for most of us is a more visible North American league. Yeah, it's real puzzling. Karlsson was better than Rakell at the WJCs, and he was more effective in Norfolk than Rakell was. That is why most of the people that follow that team have him ahead of Rakell. Maybe things will be different when they are both having to play in the NHL, but as I only have those two things to compare them with, I am going with Karlsson.

Norfolk watchers seemed to like Karlsson significantly better than Rakell.

And Karlsson was actually always well ahead of Rakell for me in terms of potential, even when they were drafted. His first SEL year moved him ahead of Rakell for "prospect rankings." So actually there hasn't been any real change in my view of him.

But yeah there has been a shift in terms of the board opinions. IMO he's finally moving up to where he should have been.

I agree that he's similar to Kerdiles. But his competition the past two seasons was better, and he looked a bit better in AHL. So that's why Karlsson gets the nod.

Again, I'm not saying it's crazy, I disagree but fully see the logic. However, I guess I'm saying it's a little odd just how much his popularity has exploded, especially with, as Exit Dose mentioned, such limited viewing. Even though he ranked second at one time(and does again), I don't even remember this with Vatanen, and the hype from Finnish posters was/is crazy.

And to reiterate one last time, this isn't about the fact that guys have Karlsson ahead of those two, it's more that it doesn't even seem to be much of a debate, which is weird given how close they all are.

 

[Sojourn]

I think Sami's hype was tempered a bit by how good Lindholm looked.

 

[snarktacular]

Again, I'm not saying it's crazy, I disagree but fully see the logic. However, I guess I'm saying it's a little odd just how much his popularity has exploded, especially with, as Exit Dose mentioned, such limited viewing. Even though he ranked second at one time(and does again), I don't even remember this with Vatanen, and the hype from Finnish posters was/is crazy.

And to reiterate one last time, this isn't about the fact that guys have Karlsson ahead of those two, it's more that it doesn't even seem to be much of a debate, which is weird given how close they all are.

As I said, IMO Rakell is not close. He's a few spots behind, but is also the next "tier."

But as to the bold, I guess we'll see how soon Kerdiles or Rakell come after in the board rankings. It is a theoretical outcome of polls like this (one vote, many options) where the number of votes of a losing place is not indicative of how close they are. For example if everyone likes #1 better than #2, but #2 is always #2 (ie 3-whatever are seen as a tier below), then it could be a 100% vote.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

As I said, IMO Rakell is not close. He's a few spots behind, but is also the next "tier."

But as to the bold, I guess we'll see how soon Kerdiles or Rakell come after in the board rankings. It is a theoretical outcome of polls like this (one vote, many options) where the number of votes of a losing place is not indicative of how close they are. For example if everyone likes #1 better than #2, but #2 is always #2 (ie 3-whatever are seen as a tier below), then it could be a 100% vote.

Then, I guess, I absolutely find that crazy. Karlsson's done well in the SEL, but this is a guy with fairly limited upside himself, and I don't think has done anything to put himself in a tier above a guy who's almost certainly ahead of him on the organizational depth chart at the same age.

Karlsson could prove me wrong and leapfrog Rakell to make this team, but I think you're just overrating him. Or, perhaps, underrating Rakell, but I think it's the former.

 

[Exit Dose]

Again, I'm not saying it's crazy, I disagree but fully see the logic. However, I guess I'm saying it's a little odd just how much his popularity has exploded, especially with, as Exit Dose mentioned, such limited viewing. Even though he ranked second at one time(and does again), I don't even remember this with Vatanen, and the hype from Finnish posters was/is crazy.

And to reiterate one last time, this isn't about the fact that guys have Karlsson ahead of those two, it's more that it doesn't even seem to be much of a debate, which is weird given how close they all are.

What changed is that we finally got to see all three of them in a shared circumstance. There wasn't much of a debate from what I saw between Karlsson, Kerdiles, and Rakell. Between Rakell and Kerdiles, I could see it, but Karlsson was just the best and most consistently good forward that I've seen down there the past few seasons - it wasn't even close, and it held true in both sides of the game.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

What changed is that we finally got to see all three of them in a shared circumstance. There wasn't much of a debate from what I saw between Karlsson, Kerdiles, and Rakell. Between Rakell and Kerdiles, I could see it, but Karlsson was just the best and most consistently good forward that I've seen down there the past few seasons - it wasn't even close, and it held true in both sides of the game.

You're basing that off of, what, 9 or 10 games? By almost all accounts he wasn't really effective after he came back from the worlds, and he barely played before that.

I just don't get it. This board is as cautious as any about not overrating guys due to sample sizes and whatnot, yet Karlsson's gets a pass? It'd be one thing if he was even great for all 17 games he played, but he wasn't, he was fairly streaky. Like I said, I just don't get it.

 

[snarktacular]

Then, I guess, I absolutely find that crazy. Karlsson's done well in the SEL, but this is a guy with fairly limited upside himself, and I don't think has done anything to put himself in a tier above a guy who's almost certainly ahead of him on the organizational depth chart at the same age.

Karlsson could prove me wrong and leapfrog Rakell to make this team, but I think you're just overrating him. Or, perhaps, underrating Rakell, but I think it's the former.

I may be overrating Karlsson. But read these pre-draft reports and tell me which has higher upside.

SCOUTING REPORT: ... Has decent speed, quick off the mark with good agility, a willingness to throw his weight around and compete each shift. ... Can handle the puck, set-up plays as well as finish but lacks the high end offensive talent. ... Plays with good energy, showing some solid work ethic in his own zone. Does not have the best shot nor does he have the ability to beat defenders one-on-one on a consistent basis. Forechecks hard and makes life miserable for opponents with his abrasiveness and can contribute in more ways than on the score sheet.
NHL POTENTIAL: Bottom six character forward

SCOUTING REPORT: A good two-way forward. Skates well with impressive quickness and agility. Has good speed but instead uses anticipation and positional understanding to be in the right place at the right time. ... Has nice hockey sense, smarts and an understanding of his role in all zones. Shows good quick hands that can beat defenders one-on-one or control the puck in traffic. Has a good amount of energy and compete in his game. Uses his vision to play the role of playmaker but also can put the puck in the net. Not overly physical but is not afraid to drive the net and pay a price for a scoring chance. ...
NHL POTENTIAL: Top six two-way forward.

I'm not saying they were drafted in the wrong order. They weren't. Karlsson was a skinny, underdeveloped guy with high upside but some risk. And showed good two-way potential. Rakell was a pro-style, limited upside guy with a high floor. Mostly defensive potential. Now Karlsson seems to be on the road to fulfilling his potential. So that's why he's leapfrogged Rakell.

You're basing that off of, what, 9 or 10 games? By almost all accounts he wasn't really effective after he came back from the worlds, and he barely played before that.

I just don't get it. This board is as cautious as any about not overrating guys due to sample sizes and whatnot, yet Karlsson's gets a pass? It'd be one thing if he was even great for all 17 games he played, but he wasn't, he was fairly streaky. Like I said, I just don't get it.

Also two season of rather effusive praise from the Europeans.

 

[Exit Dose]

You're basing that off of, what, 9 or 10 games? By almost all accounts he wasn't really effective after he came back from the worlds, and he barely played before that.

I just don't get it. This board is as cautious as any about not overrating guys due to sample sizes and whatnot, yet Karlsson's gets a pass? It'd be one thing if he was even great for all 17 games he played, but he wasn't, he was fairly streaky. Like I said, I just don't get it.

I saw one person saying that. He wasn't getting on the score sheet as much, but he was still very effective.

And settle down on the sample size argument. How much of Kerdiles have you seen? How much did you see of Rakell? How much of Karlsson? You and most others here are operating off of small sample sizes with most of these players, for some people it's no sample size.

You're acting like Karlsson was this mediocre prospect until he showed up in Norfolk, when in reality, he has been a more dominant player in far tougher leagues than the two players you seem to think that he should be lagging behind. The funny part about that is that I'm not sure how you're making that judgment, so maybe it would help me understand the problem if you do a little compare and contrast based on the things that you've seen involving those players, and what specifically you think should put one ahead of the other.

I went through the hassle of finding streams for a few of his HV71 games last year, I managed to catch a couple of games - it's difficult with the time zone difference, but I have no real experience with the SHL to put that into context; like I could with minor pro, college, and junior. He looked good there and at the WJCs, but I was reserving judgment till I saw him play a bit in a North American league that I have that familiarity with. His 17 games settled most of that for me. He was that convincing. His worst games were still much better than Rakell's average games. He didn't disappear like Kerdiles did at times. He didn't get lost like Kerdiles did at times. He always found ways to contribute. He looked like he had been playing with the team all season long.

 

[Exit Dose]

I'm not saying they were drafted in the wrong order. They weren't. Karlsson was a skinny, underdeveloped guy with high upside but some risk. And showed good two-way potential. Rakell was a pro-style, limited upside guy with a high floor. Mostly defensive potential. Now Karlsson seems to be on the road to fulfilling his potential. So that's why he's leapfrogged Rakell.

Exactly, he was drafted as a 'high risk, high reward' prospect. Since then he has done all the right things to have that risk melt away.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I saw one person saying that. He wasn't getting on the score sheet as much, but he was still very effective.

And settle down on the sample size argument. How much of Kerdiles have you seen? How much did you see of Rakell? How much of Karlsson? You and most others here are operating off of small sample sizes with most of these players, for some people it's no sample size.

You're acting like Karlsson was this mediocre prospect until he showed up in Norfolk, when in reality, he has been a more dominant player in far tougher leagues than the two players you seem to think that he should be lagging behind. The funny part about that is that I'm not sure how you're making that judgment, so maybe it would help me understand the problem if you do a little compare and contrast based on the things that you've seen involving those players, and what specifically you think should put one ahead of the other.

I went through the hassle of finding streams for a few of his HV71 games last year, I managed to catch a couple of games - it's difficult with the time zone difference, but I have no real experience with the SHL to put that into context; like I could with minor pro, college, and junior. He looked good there and at the WJCs, but I was reserving judgment till I saw him play a bit in a North American league that I have that familiarity with. His 17 games settled most of that for me. He was that convincing. His worst games were still much better than Rakell's average games. He didn't disappear like Kerdiles did at times. He didn't get lost like Kerdiles did at times. He always found ways to contribute. He looked like he had been playing with the team all season long.

Whoa, there's no need to get defensive, I'm not slamming your boy here, I'm simply making an observation. I never said that he's a mediocre prospect, just that there isn't anything IMO to put him easily ahead of Rakell, and also Kerdiles. The sample size thing I something I typically disagree with, but just wondering why it's always said elsewhere and for other guys, yet wasn't a factor here.

I'll say it for probably the fifth time, I'm not ragging on Karlsson, I just don't see how he's easily ahead of those two, that's not an insult. He did well in the SHL, yes, but it's also easy for a smaller and skilled player to do that. His worst games weren't as bad as Rakell's or Kerdiles', but Rakell had a lot more to go on for judging that, and Kerdiles was getting his first experience as a pro, this isn't unexpected.

As for comparing the three, I've said numerous times I think they're close, and my argument has nothing to do with not liking Karlsson being ahead of the other two, it's that I don't get how he's supposedly much higher than the other two. I think he's a nice offensive talent with a good defensive game, but I don't see him being more than a decent second line player. I see Kerdiles as pretty close to the same thing, but with a more North American game, with perhaps a little less offensive upside and more defensive upside, even as a winger. As for Rakell, I think he can possibly produce close to what Karlsson will, but brings a better defensive game and also a better style for NA hockey. I think his IQ is just too good for him not to be an important player for this team down the road.

There's no need to get defensive, I have no issue with anyone ranking Karlsson ahead and wouldn't argue it if it was just that. But I just don't see him being on another tier, and I find it odd that many have all of a sudden.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I may be overrating Karlsson. But read these pre-draft reports and tell me which has higher upside.





I'm not saying they were drafted in the wrong order. They weren't. Karlsson was a skinny, underdeveloped guy with high upside but some risk. And showed good two-way potential. Rakell was a pro-style, limited upside guy with a high floor. Mostly defensive potential. Now Karlsson seems to be on the road to fulfilling his potential. So that's why he's leapfrogged Rakell.

No, I get what you're saying, and wouldn't argue Karlsson has/had the higher offensive upside. My point, though, is I don't think it's that much higher. I don't see Karlsson as having crazy offensive potential, but good enough that he'd be a good second liner. As for Rakell, it's lower, but I still see him as having decent upside, and a great downside. Basically, I see Karlsson as a ~50 point guy and Rakell as a ~40+ point guy. Considering defensive abilities and the difference in probability of reaching that potential, yeah, I don't see much difference between the two rankings-wise.

Also two season of rather effusive praise from the Europeans.

Well, there wasn't that much, and again, when this thing happened with Vatanen, despite there being much, much more hype and more accolades to back it up, it was brushed off a decent amount. Sami's size obviously played a part, but it's not like Karlsson is big, either, and his lack of size may hurt him in North America.

 

[snarktacular]

1 Gibson
2 Vatanen
3 Karlsson
4 Ritchie
5 Kerdiles
6 Andersen
7 Rakell
8 Theodore
9 Petersson
10 Sorensen
11 Noesen
12 Manson
13 Montour
14 Welinski
15 Roy
16 Wagner
meh

 

[DaDucks*]

I haven't seen a lick of Karlsson's game. Unfortunately, the only streaming I do involves a toilet, not a computer.

 

[ShadowDuck]

1 Gibson
2 Vatanen
3 Karlsson
4 Ritchie
5 Kerdiles
6 Andersen
7 Rakell
8 Theodore
9 Petersson
10 Sorensen
11 Noesen
12 Manson
13 Montour
14 Welinski
15 Roy
16 Wagner
meh

Whoa, this is my list exactly, other than I have Ritchie at #2, and Noesen and Manson ahead of Sorensen.

 

[snarktacular]

No, I get what you're saying, and wouldn't argue Karlsson has/had the higher offensive upside. My point, though, is I don't think it's that much higher. I don't see Karlsson as having crazy offensive potential, but good enough that he'd be a good second liner. As for Rakell, it's lower, but I still see him as having decent upside, and a great downside. Basically, I see Karlsson as a ~50 point guy and Rakell as a ~40+ point guy. Considering defensive abilities and the difference in probability of reaching that potential, yeah, I don't see much difference between the two rankings-wise.



Well, there wasn't that much, and again, when this thing happened with Vatanen, despite there being much, much more hype and more accolades to back it up, it was brushed off a decent amount. Sami's size obviously played a part, but it's not like Karlsson is big, either, and his lack of size may hurt him in North America.

Hmm. OK so I have similar offensive expectations as you. 50 for Karlsson and 40 for Rakell. But a couple things.

I think they have similar defensive upside. Say the defensive equivalent of a "45 point forward" for both. Except Rakell could be more of a shut-down guy, whereas Karlsson more of a systems guy. A Datsyuk vs a Zetterberg.

Also I see Karlsson as a guy who could anchor the scoring, whereas Rakell would be a contributor but not driver.

But you know what, they might make a good 2-way 2nd line together. Throw on an Etem or Kerdiles.

 

[Exit Dose]

Karlsson has edges on those two defensively that can't be taught. He reads, anticipates, and reacts to defensive situations faster than either of them. With experience, those two may be able to close the gap a bit, assuming that Karlsson doesn't see similar improvements with experience, but I think that it will always be one of those things he has over them. He's currently better in his positioning. Really, the only area that I think that they have a significant edge on him, on defense, is that both Rakell and Kerdiles are better at the dot.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Literally blown away Vatanen got #2. Must have been a Finland invasion. What did he do last year that made him just 5 spots in our rankings? He arguably had a better year last year in the AHL then splitting his time this year. Whereas Theodore and Karlsson had huge years.

Theodore
Richie
Karlsson

Those 3 have the highest upside. Any of them are ok with me.

you can't be serious
yes lets just claim finnish bias because vatanen gets voted highly, not the fact he tied all our defensemen in goals despite only playing 48 games, or the team record being insanely good with him in the lineup.

i would not vote him 2, but to claim it's like some sort of atrocity is laughable, you can easily make a case for him above ALL the guys you named

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

you can't be serious
yes lets just claim finnish bias because vatanen gets voted highly, not the fact he tied all our defensemen in goals despite only playing 48 games, or the team record being insanely good with him in the lineup.

i would not vote him 2, but to claim it's like some sort of atrocity is laughable, you can easily make a case for him above ALL the guys you named

That depends on what criteria you use, and clearly everybody is not using the same one. That's why I suggested it might make more sense to have the vote based on a specific criteria. But I suppose this way is better because it will help allow us to continue fighting amongst ourselves all summer long.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Karlsson has edges on those two defensively that can't be taught. He reads, anticipates, and reacts to defensive situations faster than either of them. With experience, those two may be able to close the gap a bit, assuming that Karlsson doesn't see similar improvements with experience, but I think that it will always be one of those things he has over them. He's currently better in his positioning. Really, the only area that I think that they have a significant edge on him, on defense, is that both Rakell and Kerdiles are better at the dot.

You've seen more of him than I, but that definitely doesn't sound right. Rakell has a great hockey IQ, and a big part of his extended look last season(which is even more impressive due to the lockout) and his looks this season are due to his defensive abilities. Perhaps that's not a slight on Rakell, but rather a compliment to Karlsson, but I've never seen his defensive game praised to that extent, and never really saw it in limited viewings.

Rakell also has a definite size advantage, which can't be overlooked.