Prospect Info: 2014 Prospect Ranking Poll #4

[The Midnight Burrito]

From the last poll:Karlsson takes #3 with around 36% of the vote.


Each poll be open for 48 hours. If it's not close after 24 hours, I'll call it. If it is, it'll go the full 48. In the event of a tie after 48 hours, a 24-hour runoff will be held. The winner will get the open spot; the loser will go back into the pool, not get the next-lowest rank. The poll will go up to #25. Players are in the poll on the basis of HF's prospect criteria. Essentially, skaters with less than 65 games before the season of their 24th birthday, or goalies with less than 45 games before the season of their 24th birthday, are considered prospects. There are some nuances with respect to older-signed players, but I believe that applies only to Farragher and Andersen, who can remain a prospect for a bit yet.

Vote on players using whatever criteria you like. This isn't the readiness poll or the talent poll or the most-likely-to-be-best poll per se, it's just a survey of who we as Duck fans like.

Prior years results (that I could find):
2004-05 Lockout II Edition
2010 Edition
2011 Edition
2012 Edition
2013 Lockout III Edition
(if anyone can find other years, let me know and I'll add them)

year | rank | Prospect | year | rank | Prospect | year | rank | Prospect | change | year | rank | Prospect | change | year | rank | Prospect | change 2005 | 1 | Getzlaf | 2010 | 1 | Sbisa | 2011 | 1 | Etem | +5 | 2012 | 1 | Palmieri | +2 | 2013 | 1 | Gibson | +6
| 2 | Bryzgalov || 2 | Fowler || 2 | Holland | +2 || 2 | Vatanen | +2 || 2 | Lindholm | +3
| 3 | Perry || 3 | Gardiner || 3 | Palmieri | +2 || 3 | Etem | -2 || 3 | Silfverberg |n/a
| 4 | Smid || 4 | Holland || 4 | Vatanen | +3 || 4 | Holland | -2 || 4 | Etem | -1
| 5 | Holmqvist || 5 | Palmieri || 5 | REDACTED | +11 || 5 | Lindholm |n/a|| 5 | Rakell | +3
| 6 | Brent || 6 | Etem || 6 | DSP | +7 || 6 | DSP |0|| 6 | Holland | -2
| 7 | Kunitz || 7 | Vatanen || 7 | Gibson |n/a|| 7 | Gibson |0|| 7 | Vatanen | -5
| 8 | Popovic || 8 | Clark || 8 | Rakell |n/a|| 8 | Rakell |0|| 8 | Kerdiles | +1
| 9 | Smirnov || 9 | Mitera || 9 | Maroon |n/a|| 9 | Kerdiles |n/a|| 9 | Noesen |n/a
| 10 | S. O'Brien || 10 | Bonino || 10 | Bonino |0|| 10 | Karlsson | +4 || 10 | Karlsson |0
| 11 | Saunders || 11 | Deschamps || 11 | Clark | -3 || 11 | Andersen |n/a|| 11 | Theodore |n/a
| 12 | Smith || 12 | McMillan || 12 | Friberg |n/a|| 12 | Wagner | +6 || 12 | Andersen | -1
| 13 | Glenncross || 13 | DSP || 13 | Deschamps | -2 || 13 | Friberg | -1 || 13 | Smith-Pelly | -7
| 14 | Korsunov || 14 | Newton || 14 | Karlsson |n/a|| 14 | Clark | -3 || 14 | Sorensen |n/a
| 15 | Konopka || 15 | Bobkov || 15 | Bobkov |0|| 15 | Welinski | +5 || 15 | Roy | +2
| 16 | Martensson || 16 | REDACTED || 16 | Macenauer |n/a|| 16 | Maroon | -7 || 16 | Welinski | -1
| 17 | Foster || 17 | Pielmeier || 17 | Cramarossa |n/a|| 17 | Roy |n/a|| 17 | Wagner | -5
| 18 | Penner || 18 | Sharp || 18 | Wagner |n/a|| 18 | Bobkov | -3 || 18 | Laganiere |n/a
| 19 | Klubertanz || 19 | Heed || 19 | Schofield |n/a|| 19 | Lind | +2 || 19 | Friberg | -6
| 20 | Parenteau || 20 | Manson || 20 | Welinski |n/a|| 20 | Cramarossa | -3 || 20 | Thompson |n/a
| 21 | Perrault || 21 |N/A|| 21 | Lind |n/a|| 21 | A. O'Brien |n/a|| 21 | Sarault |n/a
| 22 |N/A|| 22 |N/A|| 22 | Newton | -8 || 22 | Heed | +3 || 22 | Cramarossa | -2
| 23 |N/A|| 23 |N/A|| 23 | Carle |n/a|| 23 | Caputi |n/a|| 23 | Bobkov | -5
| 24 |N/A|| 24 |N/A|| 24 | Perlini |n/a|| 24 | Cooper |n/a|| 24 |N/A
| 25 |N/A|| 25 |N/A|| 25 | Heed | -6 || 25 | Manson |NR|| 25 |N/A

Notable Graduates:
DSP
Etem
Lindholm
Silfverberg

This year's results:

Rank | Prospect | yearly change | overall change 1 | Gibson |0| +6 (since 2011)
2 | Vatanen | +5 | +5 (since 2010)
3 | Karlsson | +7 | +11 (since 2011)

Click to read more...

 

[Gliff]

Theodore
Ritchie

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I think I'm missing the boat on Ritchie. A middling first round pick in a draft we've been hearing was weak for an entire year.

He comes in towards the end of my top ten, on the strength of his draft position and NHL size only.

 

[snarktacular]

Just a suggestion, but maybe put links to the polls in the results?

I'll edit some in in a bit.

edit: I put links to the polls into the ranking column. Do you plan to update the first thread with the OPs of all these results? That way it works better for a link for future years? Of course it doesn't actually have to be done until the rankings are all finished.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Just a suggestion, but maybe put links to the polls in the results?

I'll edit some in in a bit.

Oh, you mean link to each prior poll? Sure, that's fine with me.

 

[snarktacular]

Oh, you mean link to each prior poll? Sure, that's fine with me.

Yeah links to past polls. It makes a nice reference. For example, if I post a complete list I can look up that my list. Or just to see the past votes.

I'm not bored enough to do it for past years, but I did it for this year's 2.5 polls.

I think I'm missing the boat on Ritchie. A middling first round pick in a draft we've been hearing was weak for an entire year.

He comes in towards the end of my top ten, on the strength of his draft position and NHL size only.

I'm not too enthused about Ritchie either, but he has the tools and potential. It's kind of like Ryan, where I didn't really like him but I had to put him high anyways. Although I guess it's unlike Holland where I didn't like his "likelihood to reach potential" as well as being unconvinced of the potential in the first place.

So I voted Ritchie at #4. Just a shade above Kerdiles.

 

[Kalv]

Like last poll - Theo

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Yeah links to past polls. It makes a nice reference. For example, if I post a complete list I can look up that my list. Or just to see the past votes.

I'm not bored enough to do it for past years, but I did it for this year's 2.5 polls.

I've still got three weeks til my job starts, with really nothing left to do, so that's a project I'll probably trickle through.

I'm not too enthused about Ritchie either, but he has the tools and potential. It's kind of like Ryan, where I didn't really like him but I had to put him high anyways. Although I guess it's unlike Holland where I didn't like his "likelihood to reach potential" as well as being unconvinced of the potential in the first place.

So I voted Ritchie at #4. Just a shade above Kerdiles.

Why over Kerdiles or Andersen? Ceiling?

 

[WrecKed]

Andersen, he gets overshadowed by Gibson too much

 

[DaDucks*]

I think I'm missing the boat on Ritchie. A middling first round pick in a draft we've been hearing was weak for an entire year.

He comes in towards the end of my top ten, on the strength of his draft position and NHL size only.

They say he has nhl skating ability. Factor that in with his size, and you have something special.

 

[Teemu Kariya]

Andersen, he gets overshadowed by Gibson too much

Exactly, he's the one left in this poll who has shown he can be a NHL regular, and even if you just look at the potential one has, i am pretty sure he's a number one goalie in the future!

 

[JabbaJabba]

Went with Richie again.

I think it's a quite positive thing that we are fighting about the order of our ranking. Shows that there are plenty of guys with potential.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

They say he has nhl skating ability. Factor that in with his size, and you have something special.

Maybe. Maybe you have Artyukhin.

 

[snarktacular]

Why over Kerdiles or Andersen? Ceiling?

Andersen should probably be higher. And I'm not sure how to answer it without being hypocritical in some way.

I would say he's a goalie and that's scary. But then Gibson is 1st and has been for awhile.

And Andersen is more proven then all of the guys I voted earlier. He's been good in higher leagues like how I chose Karlsson.

Andersen's ceiling is probably on par with Kerdiles and Karlsson, and a bit below Ritchie.

So I guess the answer is I have 2-6 all fairly equivalent and flipped some coins. Combined with being a goalie.

 

[DaDucks*]

Freddie should have been number #3..... He loves that number

 

[Fighter]

Voted Rakell before so I'm voting him again.

Edit: Didn't even realized Andersen is still considered a prospect. He's my man for sure.

 

[2faded]

Maybe. Maybe you have Artyukhin.

His problem was he was just dumb, at least when it comes to hockey. He had the size speed and skill to go coast to coast and would on the rare occasion.

 

[Sojourn]

His problem was he was just dumb, at least when it comes to hockey. He had the size speed and skill to go coast to coast and would on the rare occasion.

I think that's over-simplifying it a bit. I think Spicy's point is that big, skilled guys who skate well don't equal automatic success. There is no guarantee Ritchie even ends up an NHL player, let alone "something special", or even something remotely close to that. For every player who can hit their potential, there are even more who fall well short.

We'll definitely know more as we see him develop, but he was just drafted and at this point everything about him is what he could be, not necessarily what he is.

 

[Static]

I'm taking Ritchie because I trust our scouts, and if they wanted him 10th overall, I'm trusting they're seeing big potential.

 

[ShadowDuck]

Maybe. Maybe you have Artyukhin.

Arty had elite level skating. Ugh, I miss that fool. Dude could have been an absolute beast.

Still surprised by the lack of love for Ritchie, a little for the new toy syndrome, but mostly he has more upside than guys like Rakell and Theodore, imo. (Edit: Just checked the poll results, didn't realize he was winning lol, I was judging off the comments.)

I'm still not a fan of Theodore, reminds me too much of J. Schultz where he's scared to play on the boards and is all offense.

 

[Sojourn]

Arty had elite level skating. Ugh, I miss that fool. Dude could have been an absolute beast.

Still surprised by the lack of love for Ritchie, a little for the new toy syndrome, but mostly he has more upside than guys like Rakell and Theodore, imo. (Edit: Just checked the poll results, didn't realize he was winning lol, I was judging off the comments.)

I'm still not a fan of Theodore, reminds me too much of J. Schultz where he's scared to play on the boards and is all offense.

I haven't seen evidence that Theodore is scared to play on the boards(everything I've read says he needs to add strength, but nothing about shying away from physical play, and those are two very different things), and all the reports I read about this last season suggested that Theodore seemed to be making good progress at improving in the defensive zone. Justin Schultz was 22 when he came to the NHL and showed those issues. At 19 years of age, Theodore is still growing into his body, and likely learning how to apply himself physically.

I think comparing him to Schultz(in terms of weaknesses) is pretty unfair to Theodore. Schultz was older, and had been playing in the NCAA where they emphasize strong defense and building strength. Furthermore, one of Schultz's big problems wasn't an inability to play defense, but an unwillingness. We saw it against Anaheim. He'd make some good plays, but he was lazy about getting to the right position, or skating back to get into the play.

I mean, really... look at Cam Fowler at 18, and look at him now at 22. I'm not saying that Theodore is anything like Fowler, but those years saw a huge difference in the player. As a rookie, his defensive game was pretty weak, and you could say a lot of the same things about Fowler that you just said about Schultz: not strong on the boards, focused on offensive play, etc... That's the type of thing that players work on, so they can round out their game. Schultz was a 2008 pick, and Theodore was a 2013 pick. That's 5 years of development that Schultz has, and Theodore will be able to take advantage of. 5 key years of development. By the time Theodore is 24, we'll likely already know exactly what kind of player he is, but we don't really know now. Not by a long shot.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Andersen should probably be higher. And I'm not sure how to answer it without being hypocritical in some way.

I would say he's a goalie and that's scary. But then Gibson is 1st and has been for awhile.

And Andersen is more proven then all of the guys I voted earlier. He's been good in higher leagues like how I chose Karlsson.

Andersen's ceiling is probably on par with Kerdiles and Karlsson, and a bit below Ritchie.

So I guess the answer is I have 2-6 all fairly equivalent and flipped some coins. Combined with being a goalie.

I had my list made up under the assumption Andersen had graduated, and now like you said, it's tough weighing him against the other high ceiling guys in that range. He has to slide into one of the next couple spots.

 

[gratefulyours]

voted rakell again.

 

[Exit Dose]

Mr. Andersen.

 

[Static]

The voting styles seem to be skewing this list quite a bit. Some are voting for the likliest to hit potential, some for most along in development, some for highest ceiling.

I can't tell if this is just personal prefences that will show itself statsitcally throughout the poll, or if people are mixing voting criteria from pick to pick which will skew it handily. Not that it matters too much, just interesting.

I've been voting highest ceiling thus far, but that might be a mistake. Likliehood of reaching it should probably factor in quite a bit I suppose.