Prospect Info: 2017-18 Flyers Prospects - Top 30 SKATERS, #9

[LegionOfDoom91]

Laberge has struggled with consistency throughout his junior career so far. He's had some stuff out of his control that played into but now he's going to be in his last year in juniors as a 19-20 year old. He needs to put together a really strong season this year.

 

[BernieParent]

Vorobyov
Ratcliffe
Laczynski
Hagg
Friedman

Your little mind tricks won't work. Hagg in the bagg, my shaggy magg!

 

[Roo Mad Bro]

Our favorite Devils supporter has been on a roll lately.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Our favorite Devils supporter has been on a roll lately.

I dislike rival teams but not to the point where it comes off like you dislike them more than you actually like your favorite team.

At the end of the day I'm much more interested in the Flyers than I am the Pens, Rangers, Devils, etc.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Come on dudes and dudettes, it's gotta be Ratcliffe. The kid has legit top line potential and the only thing scouts really say is lacking is his strength, which at 6'6" should start to come around in the very near future. Why are we voting guys with middle or bottom six potential ahead of him?

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Ratcliffe is no different than most of these guys being selected right now. A lot of these guys they took this draft Ratcliffe included are a ways out.

 

[deadhead]

Come on dudes and dudettes, it's gotta be Ratcliffe. The kid has legit top line potential and the only thing scouts really say is lacking is his strength, which at 6'6" should start to come around in the very near future. Why are we voting guys with middle or bottom six potential ahead of him?

I wouldn't say Ratcliffe has top line potential unless he puts up 100+ in juniors or more than a ppg in the AHL. IF he fills out, IF he continues to develop his skill set, he could be a 2nd line PF.

Rubtsov may have top line potential.
Frost, too early to make that claim.
Ratcliffe, hasn't shown enough yet for that claim to be credible.

 

[Magua]

Besides Laberge, NAK is the tough guy to rank for me, and I don't know where he will get ranked here, but I think he's right up there with some of the upcoming guys. Fresh faces who were drafted in similar spots as him vault above him, but he had a very good junior career that some of those guys hope they can have. How much will unfairly toiling away on the Phantoms's 4th line affect the votes?

 

[flyerslducks]

if strome was a strong skater already, where would he fall in the list then???

 

[Curufinwe]

I hope Vorobyev catches up. It's much quicker to do the next poll if it's a player lower down the alphabetical list who wins.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

if strome was a strong skater already, where would he fall in the list then???

If Strome was just an average skater right now he's likely a first round pick instead of a fourth round pick. But in reality he's truly an atrocious skater that it's tough to really project him right now.

 

[Ruck Over]

NAK should probably fall somewhere between #13 & #16. NAK is close to falling into the Taylor Leier trap though, unfair as that may be. Good, but not flashy, nor good enough.

I think Strome's skating can get better, it is fixable. I will probably vote him higher than where he is at in reality, based upon future desire.

That's the real weird thing about this poll. Some guys get voted on for actual results, others for future potential, seems a fun hypocritical puzzle to be sorted out.

 

[deadhead]

They're all being voted on future potential.

Those with better current production, especially at higher levels, have a higher floor, but not necessarily a higher ceiling.

Those who've just been drafted don't have great production, or they would have been 1st rd picks.

 

[Ruck Over]

They're all being voted on future potential.

Those with better current production, especially at higher levels, have a higher floor, but not necessarily a higher ceiling.

Those who've just been drafted don't have great production, or they would have been 1st rd picks.

Maybe phrased better as- some are judged by, "What have you done for me lately", others are judged by, "What will you do for me later".

NAK and Lindblom were once closer to each other in potential, but NAK played for Gordon, and Lindblom excelled in the SHL. Who's to say NAK couldn't have performed similarly given he didn't have a dunder head as his coach?

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I have a question to those voting Hagg -- Do you think he's a lock as a bottom pairing D or do you think he has more upside than that?

I'm only asking because people have thrown out statements about mindsets and I don't know what's true anymore. You can even PM me if you don't want to answer in public.

 

[Ruck Over]

I see Hagg as a #4-#6. Won't cringe when he's on the ice, if he's the worst player out there, you have a good corps. Chris Therien/Matt Carle 'esque, without having to play next to a #1 to get good play from.

 

[Brayden Fattison]

I have a question to those voting Hagg -- Do you think he's a lock as a bottom pairing D or do you think he has more upside than that?

I'm only asking because people have thrown out statements about mindsets and I don't know what's true anymore. You can even PM me if you don't want to answer in public.

I see him as a solid bottom pairing puck mover with the slight chance of him being the d-man we saw in his NHL debut (joining the rush effectively). I also gave him the edge because he has performed well on a higher level than most of the others.

 

[Magua]

I don't think Leier and NAK are anything alike. Leier is a worker to his credit, but NAK is bigger, stronger, and has a lot more NHL caliber scoring tools at his disposal.

 

[Ruck Over]

I don't think Leier and NAK are anything alike. Leier is a worker to his credit, but NAK is bigger, stronger, and has a lot more NHL caliber scoring tools at his disposal.

Hmm, alike as in, "Hey, this guy might be able to play in the NHL." Followed by a few years of other young prospects entering the pool and going, "NAK, he's not as shiny as Patrick, or Frost, or xyz." I feel that's what happened with Leier, but more so by adding guys like Bellemare, Vdv, Luby, and even Raffl to a very small extent.

Did not mean to imply NAK = Leier

 

[Flyerfan13]

I have a question to those voting Hagg -- Do you think he's a lock as a bottom pairing D or do you think he has more upside than that?

I'm only asking because people have thrown out statements about mindsets and I don't know what's true anymore. You can even PM me if you don't want to answer in public.

I voted vorobyev but I get what ur saying to me i don't see hagg as more than a bottom pair dman after watching him play 3 years on the phantoms. I am curious how stizzle or magua would compare hagg to Friedman. Small sample size but Friedman looked good in his phantoms debut.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

I wouldn't say Ratcliffe has top line potential unless he puts up 100+ in juniors or more than a ppg in the AHL. IF he fills out, IF he continues to develop his skill set, he could be a 2nd line PF.

Rubtsov may have top line potential.
Frost, too early to make that claim.
Ratcliffe, hasn't shown enough yet for that claim to be credible.

None of these guys have shown anything with regard to what they'll be in the NHL, but in terms of potential, Ratcliffe's is higher than anyone left on the board. If he doesn't have legit top line potential he's definitely got top six potential. Based on all accounts he's big, he can skate, he sees and plays the game well, has good hands, etc. It is his strength that people want to see improve, which compared to something like skating is no big deal. I'm not suggesting he is a lock to be on the top line (or anything in the NHL), but in terms of potential if we are looking at Wade Allison and Michael Vorobyov ahead of him, I think that's a mistake. Not a knock on either player but Wade Allison didn't put up PPG in his draft year or in his first year of college, and Allison played for the championship team compared to Ratcliffe who played on the second worst team in the league (and Allison put up solid numbers in his freshman but nothing eye-popping...there was another freshman that is as of yet undrafted that scored only five fewer points than he).

Vorobyov I like and I think will be a good player, but Ratcliffe's impact if he reaches his potential (i.e., playing on a top line with Nolan Patrick) vs. Vorobyov impact if he reaches his potential (i.e., third line center) is far greater. I get people voting for Hagg over Ratcliffe at this point, because I think Hagg should be higher as wel, but Allison and Vorobyov I just don't see.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I voted vorobyev but I get what ur saying to me i don't see hagg as more than a bottom pair dman after watching him play 3 years on the phantoms. I am curious how stizzle or magua would compare hagg to Friedman. Small sample size but Friedman looked good in his phantoms debut.

I truly didn't want to call people's conclusions into question. I wanted to understand why people are voting for him because it's a common point of discussion just what people see in him.

Friedman is a pet prospect of mine. I've seen him play a handful of games over the years in person. Given the higher exposure in the AHL, he should see a nice jump next year.

I get people voting for Hagg over Ratcliffe at this point, because I think Hagg should be higher as wel, but Allison and Vorobyov I just don't see.

Speaking to ceilings, it's pretty simple. Middle 6 C or 2nd line Winger >>>> Jack of all Trades 3rd pairing D. If you want to call Vorobyev a 3C instead, it's the same answer for me. I use middle 6 because I don't think there's much difference between a 2C and 3C.

 

[Stizzle]

I voted vorobyev but I get what ur saying to me i don't see hagg as more than a bottom pair dman after watching him play 3 years on the phantoms. I am curious how stizzle or magua would compare hagg to Friedman. Small sample size but Friedman looked good in his phantoms debut.

I haven't seen Friedman enough to have any real opinion on him. He's a mystery at this point. The only thing I can say is that he played very well in his AHL debut and looked like a very good skater.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I have a question to those voting Hagg -- Do you think he's a lock as a bottom pairing D or do you think he has more upside than that?

I'm only asking because people have thrown out statements about mindsets and I don't know what's true anymore. You can even PM me if you don't want to answer in public.

The way I look at it, at least, is Hagg at this point seems pretty much a lock to be a solid regular NHL defenseman. I would say a #4-#6, capable of maybe eventually playing 20 minutes, and he's probably going to make the team this season. With some guys, like Ratcliffe, for example, there's just less data, so it feels more like a completely blind projection. Right now I have no feel for if he'll develop into a top line NHLer, 4th line NHLer, AHLer, etc. so I want to see how he performs next season before I give him the edge in a tight rankings battle. See what happened to Laberge after his draft season? That's what I'm concerned about.

 

[Random Forest]

The way I look at it, at least, is Hagg at this point seems pretty much a lock to be a solid regular NHL defenseman.

I don't know what player people have been following for the last four years to be this confident in Hagg's NHL upside.

Right now, Hagg is a lot like Leier for me. Could he stick as a bottom-of-the-lineup guy? Yeah, sure, but you can't guarantee anything more than replacement-level performance out of him. I don't know where the idea that he's "pretty much a lock" comes from.