Prospect Info: 2015 Annual Prospect Poll #10

[Vipers31]

I think that people are maybe going a little overboard with Kerdiles's rookie season. The last time I saw a player as effective at the college level as Kerdiles was, it was David Backes. You need to give him a little time to catch up with the speed of the game before writing off his upside. He was very impressive with the Badgers.

Maybe you're right, but it was less about the rookie season with me, and more about not really being aware that he was that impressive back in College.

 

[Tecumseh]

I'm thinking Kase should start to factor in here soon.

After Nattinen and Petersson are off the board, Kase is my next choice. Followed by Roy. Pretty much a crapshoot after that.

 

[Exit Dose]

Maybe you're right, but it was less about the rookie season with me, and more about not really being aware that he was that impressive back in College.

This is a common problem with prospects in college. If they aren't the property of a Canadian franchise or some rare bird like Eichel, then little trickles out about what they are doing. I think people also mistakenly contextualize their stats with those in Canadian junior. For instance, it's very easy to look at Kerdiles's numbers as a freshman and think that they're good but nothing special, but the thing is he was one of the top three scorers for his age bracket.
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u19&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u20&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
He coupled that with some solid defensive play by the end of that season, something that underclassmen usually struggle with the most in their first two seasons.

 

[duxfan1101]

After Nattinen and Petersson are off the board, Kase is my next choice. Followed by Roy. Pretty much a crapshoot after that.

Terry and Welinski probably afterward

 

[OCSportsfan]

This is a common problem with prospects in college. If they aren't the property of a Canadian franchise or some rare bird like Eichel, then little trickles out about what they are doing. I think people also mistakenly contextualize their stats with those in Canadian junior. For instance, it's very easy to look at Kerdiles's numbers as a freshman and think that they're good but nothing special, but the thing is he was one of the top three scorers for his age bracket.
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u19&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u20&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
He coupled that with some solid defensive play by the end of that season, something that underclassmen usually struggle with the most in their first two seasons.

Exit, not sure where you get your info, but it seems like you have the most insight into the prospects, so I trust you on this as well. I think Kerdiles will be a top 6 player for us, hopefully he has a break out year in the AHL.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

This is a common problem with prospects in college. If they aren't the property of a Canadian franchise or some rare bird like Eichel, then little trickles out about what they are doing. I think people also mistakenly contextualize their stats with those in Canadian junior. For instance, it's very easy to look at Kerdiles's numbers as a freshman and think that they're good but nothing special, but the thing is he was one of the top three scorers for his age bracket.
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u19&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&sort=u20&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG
He coupled that with some solid defensive play by the end of that season, something that underclassmen usually struggle with the most in their first two seasons.

You might be the only one here who actually had eyes on him in college. I saw him a little bit and he was a very noticeable college player. Much less so in Norfolk.

I'm hoping that the quality of the AHL streams improve this season because I'm finally going all in on a subscription.

 

[Exit Dose]

The transition from college to pro is one of the hardest to make. They tend to have stamina problems for the first year or two.

 

[snarktacular]

You might be the only one here who actually had eyes on him in college. I saw him a little bit and he was a very noticeable college player. Much less so in Norfolk.

I'm hoping that the quality of the AHL streams improve this season because I'm finally going all in on a subscription.

You're going all in when the team isn't?

 

[Fighter]

Has to be Petersson.

 

[Nurmagomedov]

Are you seriously saying that Pettersson didn't improve in his first season post draft? Really? Did you actually follow him at all? Did you watch him play consistently?

Whatever improvement he had wasn't enough to secure icetime in the SHL, which was the expectation for a high draft pick who already played some SHL games pre draft. Instead, he played the most games in the U20 league without statistical improvement from the 13-14 season. Skelleftea is a good team in the SHL but they did have three(!!!) under 20 yo d-men playing over Pettersson, including a 5th rounder from Pettersson's draft.

I said "improve and adjust and be effective", remember. Minor improvement without the other two isn't a successful season in his situation where he's competing for icetime in the SHL.

It does matter, because you're essentially knocking Nattinen and Pettersson for not being NHL players right now, even though Wagner wasn't even close at the same age. They were never expected to be in the NHL at this point. Few players are, at the age of 18-19.

I don't recognize this criticism at all. I'm not knocking those guys for not being NHL'ers. I'm knocking their prospect ranking in relation to another player to reflect the fact that the odds are steep against any 2nd rounder making the NHL as anything more than a bottom-sixer or bottom pairing dman.

Wagner isn't a more proven player. He's the older prospect, not the proven player. 11 games of NHL experience does not mean he deserves to be named with the likes of a Nick Bonino.

Maroon and Bonino were better prospects than Wagner is but Etem, Palmi and Holland were also better prospects than Pettersson or Nattinen are so the comparison is valid, imo. With Nattinen and Pettersson, we're talking about Deschamps and Mikkelson as prospect comparables, not Holland and Gardiner.

You aren't arguing a proven talent vs. young potential. You're arguing an older prospect, with less potential vs. a younger prospect with more. That's basically it.

Being closer to the NHL, and being 4+ years older, does not make a prospect better. Not when you start factoring in things like talent, potential, and so on...

Firstly, let me do my own arguing.
Secondly, you're being unfair here implying that i don't factor in talent and potential when doing these rankings. I do. Weighing things differently doesn't mean i do so without thought.

In the end, you can argue that way if you feel that a prospect that's likely to be a fringe NHLer / 4th liner but has an almost non-existent chance of being a top player is a better prospect than a guy that has a longer way to go, with a bigger chance that he'll never make it to the NHL, but might be an impact player if he does.

I personally consider that to be very misguided. Wagner has done really well for himself to get to where he is, but he has really "only" done exceptionally well for a late-rounder's developmental path. If he establishes himself in the NHL, he's still going to be a relatively dime-a-dozen player. Not that there's no value in a defensively sound forward (who is still only about a 0.5 PPG offensive talent in the AHL), but there's limits to how good he'll be, and at 24 years of age, those limitations are very unlikely to disappear - at that point, suggesting age doesn't matter for a prospect is rather puzzling.

Even if a guy like Pettersson's odds of maximizing his potential are lower, there's a noteworthy chance he becomes an absolute impact player in the NHL. That's a lot more rare and is universally valued a lot more highly. A different balancing between NHL-probability and ceiling would make the draft look dramatically different than it does.

As a result of that, I also believe Pettersson should have been above Noesen/Kerdiles/Friberg, too. With Nattinen, I'm not entirely sold about the upside being that much higher, yet.

It boils down to disagreeing about the chance Pettersson turns out "an absolute impact player in the NHL". If Wagner can take one more step, he could be a Nate Thompson, who was also a .5 ppg player in the AHL. Pettersson needs to take many steps to be better than that.

 

[Ducks Nation*]

Wouldn't surprise me if Nattinen became a top 3 prospect by next year. The more I see and the more I read the more I like similar to Lindholm before.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

The transition from college to pro is one of the hardest to make. They tend to have stamina problems for the first year or two.

Sure. I get that. I'm not really dinging him per se, only as a relative matter amongst prospects in a ranking.

 

[mightyquack]

Nattinen since I voted for him last poll

 

[Carelton CA]

Whatever improvement he had wasn't enough to secure icetime in the SHL, which was the expectation for a high draft pick who already played some SHL games pre draft. Instead, he played the most games in the U20 league without statistical improvement from the 13-14 season. Skelleftea is a good team in the SHL but they did have three(!!!) under 20 yo d-men playing over Pettersson, including a 5th rounder from Pettersson's draft.

I said "improve and adjust and be effective", remember. Minor improvement without the other two isn't a successful season in his situation where he's competing for icetime in the SHL.



I don't recognize this criticism at all. I'm not knocking those guys for not being NHL'ers. I'm knocking their prospect ranking in relation to another player to reflect the fact that the odds are steep against any 2nd rounder making the NHL as anything more than a bottom-sixer or bottom pairing dman.

Maroon and Bonino were better prospects than Wagner is but Etem, Palmi and Holland were also better prospects than Pettersson or Nattinen are so the comparison is valid, imo. With Nattinen and Pettersson, we're talking about Deschamps and Mikkelson as prospect comparables, not Holland and Gardiner.


Firstly, let me do my own arguing.
Secondly, you're being unfair here implying that i don't factor in talent and potential when doing these rankings. I do. Weighing things differently doesn't mean i do so without thought.

It boils down to disagreeing about the chance Pettersson turns out "an absolute impact player in the NHL". If Wagner can take one more step, he could be a Nate Thompson, who was also a .5 ppg player in the AHL. Pettersson needs to take many steps to be better than that.

I understand this is a bunch of people who have probably never seen most of these prospects play, but yet rank them high. For reference, take a look at the Ducks draft picks from 2009 on and see how many high skill, high round picks have actually made it to the Ducks/NHL and what role they're playing now.

Wagner is being groomed for Thompson or Horcoffs role. These guys are players every good team needs. Thompson is 30 and Horcoff 36. Wagner 24, these guys need to buy in to their role and do it effectively. My point is that this type of role player is just as difficult to acquire through the draft as a top scorer. To project someones character, work ethic and willingness to pay the price. So as a "prospect", these things should be considered.