And that's fair to see it that way, there is no "wrong" way to look at it. For me it's a balance between potential and realized potential. The guys already playing pro do get graded on a harsher curve fair or not but there hasn't truly been a dominant player for us at that level either. I know there is a premium on potential but I see value in what they could contribute literally on the ice tomorrow as well.
That's where I think it would be two different rankings. The value of a prospect to me is a balance between their projected floor and ceiling, weighted more toward the area of this window that they seem to realistically be able to realize. As a prospect ages, their ceiling and floor range shrinks as we get a clearer picture of the type of player they can be. There is definitely merit to a player who can contribute sooner rather than later but my view is that does not make them a better prospect, just a better player in the moment (and a safer bet of knowing what you have in a certain player).
And my view is maybe slightly off for goalies, like Stazz mentioned, because their development curve is irregular. All things equal, I want Picks to get his time in SA and then be able to make the jump to Varly's backup once Berra is out the door. I just don't see him as more than a backup at his peak.
All in all, it depends what a person values in a prospect. I could see where some people value stability and a safe bet that a player can play at the NHL level (like Picks, who has proven he has the capability) over unrealized potential that may or may not actually happen.