Prospect Info: 2017-18 Flyers Prospects - Top 30 SKATERS, #10

[Magua]

Thank you for this wonderful treat, Cap'n. Holy ****

I hope this becomes a thing every time he scores.

 

[BernieParent]

Thank you for this wonderful treat, Cap'n. Holy ****

I hope this becomes a thing every time he scores.

Yep, it's one of those videos where the still-action facial expression fits the video so well.

I went Vorobyev on his WJC performance; ie, the only player I have actually seen play.

 

[David St Hubbins]

Went with the pimp again.....next will be sir isaac

This

 

[deadhead]

You have to look at everything, Vorobyov was not that highly regarded when drafted, in the same mold as Dove-McFalls. Was that the Russian effect - but other Russians in similar circumstances were drafted higher. Was the WJC performance a fluke or the real Vorobyov? His 11 points in 44 games doesn't mean that's his upside, merely that he didn't do anything that suggests a better player than the one we thought we were getting on draft day. And the odds are he won't put up big numbers in his first AHL season.

AK actually had two solid post-draft junior seasons with 38 goals each year, and became more responsible defensively. He was used in a checking role his first AHL season so his points were suppressed, but he's filled into his body and is now a reported 5'11 200 lbs. So I suspect we'll underrate him, he'll get a bigger offensive role this season, and when he starts racking up points his stock among fans will skyrocket.

Laberge is a 2nd rd pick who may do the same now that he's healthy, if he has a big junior season we'll be talking about him as a top 5-10 prospect in a deep pool.

So where do you put Ratcliffe? On pure potential above AK and with Laberge? Odds of achieving that potential? Probably less than say Frost because he has a unique body.

On the bright side, these arguments beat the heck out of trying to convince yourself that Gustafsson is a potential top 4 D man or that Erikkson will be a NHL goalie!

 

[WIP CALLER]

the flyers scouts thought there was not much difference between vorobyev and eriksson-ek. the Russian factor was behind his fall but our scouts loved his potential when he was drafted... so to say he was regarded the same as dove mcfalls is just blatantly false.

 

[kelmitchell]

oh captain my captain!

 

[deadhead]

the flyers scouts thought there was not much difference between vorobyev and eriksson-ek. the Russian factor was behind his fall but our scouts loved his potential when he was drafted... so to say he was regarded the same as dove mcfalls is just blatantly false.

He was drafted AFTER Dove-McFalls.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

For Hearty the real prize in the middle rounds was Russian center Mikhail Vorobyov, considered a solid second-round prospect by the team.

"We had Vorobyov really high," said Hearty. "We had quite a distance with no picks from 24 to 70...we had to take a goalie in the third (two actually) ...and Vorobyov just kept falling for whatever reason. We got to the 90's, and we got a deal where we could move back to 98 and get another pick, so we took (Samuel) Dove-McFalls, just because we thought the Russian factor might still come into effect, and (Vorobyov) was still there when we picked (at 104)."

A 6-2 center from Ufa, Vorobyov was effective in U-18 competitions for Russia this season, earning accolades for his heady defensive play.

"He needs half a step, which is just strength," said Hearty. "He's a two-way center with size. He's big and he's skilled. I look at him, and I don't see a huge, huge difference between him and (Joel Eriksson) Ek.

https://www.mckeenshockey.com/uncat...aft-table-interview-flyers-scout-todd-hearty/

 

[Magua]

Vorobyov was not that highly regarded when drafted, in the same mold as Dove-McFalls. Was that the Russian effect - but other Russians in similar circumstances were drafted higher

He had a strong u18 tournament prior to his draft and was rated as a top 25 European prospect on Central Scouting. So, yes, as the Todd Hearty quote above showed, they believed there was strong Russian factor going on for why teams didn't take him or why he was overlooked by teams' scouts. Flyers had him highly rated, so nothing else matters.

Was the WJC performance a fluke or the real Vorobyov? His 11 points in 44 games doesn't mean that's his upside, merely that he didn't do anything that suggests a better player than the one we thought we were getting on draft day. And the odds are he won't put up big numbers in his first AHL season

He averaged 9 minutes a game all situations. How many points is one supposed to score in 9 minutes? That's face puncher level in the NHL. This is common practice for Russian kids. He's in good company, as I already showed in my previous post. A Russian kid has a nothing rookie year as a 4th liner in a learning role......gets older and gains a bigger role and comes on the scene. If he stayed in the KHL, this would've likely been his route. Among Ufa players, he was 8th in scoring for forwards........yet 14th in average ice time (>25 games played). There's no way you can spin that as poor. Among the players who averaged similar ice time or more even, older players too, he led them in points.

He had a strong D+1 year in the MHL. He showed how good he was against peers internationally multiple times. If he gets a top 6 center role with PP time -- and given his pro size and pro, small ice conducive game, he could -- he has a chance to put up some solid numbers in the AHL. Everything Hearty said shows that Vorobyev has developed EXACTLY how they thought he would with time.

 

[GapToothedWonder]

If Ratcliffe turns into a good set up guy we need of come up with some sort of Newton based nickname. Since his name is Issac and he will be dropping apples.

 

[Striiker]

If Ratcliffe turns into a good set up guy we need of come up with some sort of Newton based nickname. Since his name is Issac and he will be dropping apples.

Isaac "The Fig" Ratcliffe

 

[tade]

Over 50 % for Vorobyev now with 129 votes, guess it is safe to start #11.

 

[Hiesenberg]

This is getting pretty difficult. I went Friedman, but I can't really argue about Vorobyov/Laberge/Ratcliffe I guess.

Well maybe Ratcliffe, the guy is raw and has work to do on some issues. Vorobyov is more complete. Laberge is a little closer to finish.

I think Friedman is really good and being underrated.

 

[David St Hubbins]

Close it out!

 

[deadhead]

There's no way you can spin that as poor. Among the players who averaged similar ice time or more even, older players too, he led them in points.

I'm not spinning anything as "poor," rather, as "incomplete."

If he stayed in the KHL, he might have had a much better season this year, but we'll see the same test in the AHL. Vorobyov's initial year was normal, but that's the point, he's not an exceptional young KHL talent.

He has size and skill, but observers at development camp note that he's not as quick and explosive as some other prospects, maybe he'll be a 'poor man's Couts" down the road?

My point is simply that he hasn't done enough yet to know what he'll turn out to be, just like most of the prospects at this point of the poll, except for MV, who has a higher floor but lower ceiling than most of the players at this point given he's fully developed at 24.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Definitely would've sucked if they were wrong in their belief that they could take McFalls, wait 6 picks, and still get Vorobyov, considering how highly they said they ranked Vorobyov. Not sure that was the right risk, in retrospect, even though it worked out.

 

[mja]

****ing Seamless.

 

[Flyotes]

Feeling a little Friedman disrespect.

 

[Larry44]

Feeling a little Friedman disrespect.

Why? He's a good prospect but he hasn't been seen widely. He'll have a chance to move up the rankings soon if he has a good year with the Phantoms. I'm not sure where to slot him in. Right now, Laczynski and Ratcliffe seem more likely to have NHL careers.

 

[Larry44]

I'm not spinning anything as "poor," rather, as "incomplete."

If he stayed in the KHL, he might have had a much better season this year, but we'll see the same test in the AHL. Vorobyov's initial year was normal, but that's the point, he's not an exceptional young KHL talent.

He has size and skill, but observers at development camp note that he's not as quick and explosive as some other prospects, maybe he'll be a 'poor man's Couts" down the road?

My point is simply that he hasn't done enough yet to know what he'll turn out to be, just like most of the prospects at this point of the poll, except for MV, who has a higher floor but lower ceiling than most of the players at this point given he's fully developed at 24.

In Vorobyev's defense, he WAS 1C on a good Russian WJC team, led the tourney in assists and looked very solid doing it. He's a big, strong talented kid who skates well, hits, plays D and had an amazing passing touch and good finishing skills too. Like Rubtsov, he's got some style and swagger.

What's not to like? If he's 'only' as good as Couts some day, that'll be fine with me.

 

[deadhead]

I think some people are missing the problem this year, it's not whether I like Vorobyov, it's that I can't see much distinction right now between a half dozen player because I like (but not love) them all. That is, we have a solid second tier group of prospects, all of whom have legitimate opportunities to become NHL starters.

Compare to say Leier, who might play somewhere, but talentwise is clearly behind this group - that just shows how much deeper the talent on this team has become over the last 3-4 years.

Where would Friedman rank four years ago? Where will he rank this year?

My cup runneth over (and hopefully that will lead us to the Cup).

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Isaac "The Fig" Ratcliffe

The Fig?

 

[Rebels57]

The Fig?

Because he's a tree?

 

[pit]

The Fig?

Isaac Ratcliffe to Isaac "Newton" (for dropping apples) to "Fig" "Newton".

That's my guess!

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Because he's a tree?

Isaac Newton > Fig Newton > Isaac "Fig" Ratcliffe