Prospect Info: 2015 Annual Prospect Poll #4

[Vipers31]

A little surprised that Larsson is getting considerably more mentions than Pettersson. I thought he'd be in contention starting at this spot.

What upside does Larsson have that you guys have seen other than his draft video (which was not very impressive) honest question because if you have some other videos I want to see them I have been looking everywhere.

The only video I found was a 20 minute clip following him around in a game and commentating that a poster on here posted. I was not very impressed although I know it was only one game. Anyone got more footage?

No need to kid ourselves, most of these polls are based on second-hand-scouting. Which is hardly any worse than quick youtube-scouting.

 

[Kalv]

Hey, who is Threadgill?

 

[Vipers31]

Hey, who is Threadgill?

Bodacious always sneaks in one random other name - so far it's been Coltrane, Zorn, Braxton and Threadgill, all of them great Jazz artists. (To be honest, I had to google that, myself. )

 

[Kalv]

Bodacious always sneaks in one random other name - so far it's been Coltrane, Zorn, Braxton and Threadgill, all of them great Jazz artists. (To be honest, I had to google that, myself. )

Nice. I will check them out. I`m not the biggest jazz fan but for some time now i have been thinking i should explore more music

 

[quentez]

Looks like I'm the only one voting for Friberg. Late bloomer which I think will get some chances on the big team the coming season.

 

[Paul4587]

Larsson because he has tbe highest upside IMO.

I don't see the Manson hype. He's low risk but his actual upside is limited in the sense I don't think he has the offensive game and IQ to be a top pairing guy. I see him as being a #4-5 guy which is good but not better than what a Montour or Larsson could become.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Bodacious always sneaks in one random other name - so far it's been Coltrane, Zorn, Braxton and Threadgill, all of them great Jazz artists. (To be honest, I had to google that, myself. )

Saxophonists specifically, but they've all been jazz artists to this point. I did mostly rock drummers last year (last year?) although Buddy Rich and Gene Krupa were at the top, not rockers by any means.

Nice. I will check them out. I`m not the biggest jazz fan but for some time now i have been thinking i should explore more music

Start with Coltrane. But jazz is an acquired taste.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Looks like I'm the only one voting for Friberg. Late bloomer which I think will get some chances on the big team the coming season.

Friberg is definitely on my top 5 radar but its a balance between readiness, upside and likelihood of reaching it. He's a grinder, but he's also shown flashes of high end skill and defensive instincts. He's a small guy who likes to hit and annoy. There are some contradictions to him that make me wary.

 

[JabbaJabba]

Larsson because he has tbe highest upside IMO.

I don't see the Manson hype. He's low risk but his actual upside is limited in the sense I don't think he has the offensive game and IQ to be a top pairing guy. I see him as being a #4-5 guy which is good but not better than what a Montour or Larsson could become.

I also considered the readiness and possibility to reach potential into account in valuing prospects, not just potential alone. I agree with your assessment of Manson's, Larsson's and Montour's potentials, but I'm still not sold on Montour reaching his potential and Larsson is still many years away.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Larsson because he has tbe highest upside IMO.

I don't see the Manson hype. He's low risk but his actual upside is limited in the sense I don't think he has the offensive game and IQ to be a top pairing guy. I see him as being a #4-5 guy which is good but not better than what a Montour or Larsson could become.

The one thing about Manson is the organization goes out of their way to talk about him, it seems. Reminds me a lot of Bonino, where he too was a low round guy and the organization clearly thought much higher of him than anywhere else.

They also apparently refuse to trade him despite a logjam ahead. That could obviously be a value thing, but you do wonder if they truly covet him that much and will make room for him in the future.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Looks like I'm the only one voting for Friberg. Late bloomer which I think will get some chances on the big team the coming season.

Friberg is definitely on my top 5 radar but its a balance between readiness, upside and likelihood of reaching it. He's a grinder, but he's also shown flashes of high end skill and defensive instincts. He's a small guy who likes to hit and annoy. There are some contradictions to him that make me wary.

Friberg isn't too far down my list. Led our AHL affiliate in scoring despite projecting as more of an energy line guy. I'm a big fan, and readiness definitely plays into my ranking as well.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Larsson because he has tbe highest upside IMO.

I don't see the Manson hype. He's low risk but his actual upside is limited in the sense I don't think he has the offensive game and IQ to be a top pairing guy. I see him as being a #4-5 guy which is good but not better than what a Montour or Larsson could become.

Top pairing may be a bit of a stretch but Manson's game developed dramatically since turning pro. He's shown a lot of two-way instincts that (Tesseract can correct me) he wasn't showing in college, where he was more of the steady physical type. Maybe he'll settle back into the role that got him drafted and stabilize there but there's a lot of depth to his game. Surprising to me but obviously not to the guys who drafted him.

 

[Duck Off]

What upside does Larsson have that you guys have seen other than his draft video (which was not very impressive) honest question because if you have some other videos I want to see them I have been looking everywhere.

The only video I found was a 20 minute clip following him around in a game and commentating that a poster on here posted. I was not very impressed although I know it was only one game. Anyone got more footage?

I haven't seen much video on any of our prospects. Not enough to do a thorough evaluation anyway. I've heard several people with more knowledge about him than us, say he's comparable to Lindholm. Based on that, where Mcnabb and Murray drafted him, and the few videos I've seen, I'd put him here.

IMO, an argument can be made for Larsson, Montour, or Manson for this spot. I'd rank them: Larsson, Manson, Montour personally.

 

[Ducksforcup]

I voted for Montour due to what I believe is his higher potential, but it is really close. Manson of course is far more NHL ready.

 

[Arthuros]

Manson was good when he came up, but I would take Montour over him.

 

[quentez]

Friberg is definitely on my top 5 radar but its a balance between readiness, upside and likelihood of reaching it. He's a grinder, but he's also shown flashes of high end skill and defensive instincts. He's a small guy who likes to hit and annoy. There are some contradictions to him that make me wary.

He is very Kunitz-ish. Although when Kunitz was 22 he was still playing in the NCAA.

 

[Nurmagomedov]

I don't see the Manson hype. He's low risk but his actual upside is limited in the sense I don't think he has the offensive game and IQ to be a top pairing guy.

Doesn't the same apply to Montour on the defensive side? Top pairing dmen need to do both well, really.

 

[Goose of Reason]

Doesn't the same apply to Montour on the defensive side? Top pairing dmen need to do both well, really.

Yes, but the general line of thinking is that defense can be taught and offense can not (or not to the same extent that defense can be taught anyway). Sure Montour has work to do on that side of the puck but his offensive game is very exciting.

 

[snarktacular]

The one thing about Manson is the organization goes out of their way to talk about him, it seems. Reminds me a lot of Bonino, where he too was a low round guy and the organization clearly thought much higher of him than anywhere else.

They also apparently refuse to trade him despite a logjam ahead. That could obviously be a value thing, but you do wonder if they truly covet him that much and will make room for him in the future.

This is really the tie-breaker for me voting for Manson. They seem to offer unsolicited praise about him. So that's gotta count for something.

 

[Goose of Reason]

This is really the tie-breaker for me voting for Manson. They seem to offer unsolicited praise about him. So that's gotta count for something.

That's a fair point, they were much higher on Bonino and Beleskey than the general fanbase was and they were right to be, plus Murray and his scouts seem to be gurus when it comes to defenseman. They did also say Montour would be a home run pick though, and seem very high on him as well.

 

[Nurmagomedov]

Madden said they went for a home run pick with Montour, not that Montour would be a home run. Big difference, although so far it does look like at least second deck. The way he adjusted on the fly to first the NCAA and then the AHL during the same year was remarkable.

 

[Goose of Reason]

Madden said they went for a home run pick with Montour, not that Montour would be a home run. Big difference, although so far it does look like at least second deck. The way he adjusted on the fly to first the NCAA and then the AHL during the same year was remarkable.

Ah ok, misread the quote then. At any rate it shows that they think he can be a great player and thus far he has proven them right.