Prospect Info: 2018-19 Flyers Prospects - Top 30 SKATERS, #17

[Curufinwe]

 

[VladDrag]

Went Cates after his performance at the WJSS. Still haven't seen Kalynuk enough to vote for him...

 

[BernieParent]

Let's go, people, let's correct this ridiculous ****ing oversight. Unless someone wants to get cut.

It's just spite at this point, Cap'n. We know better.

 

[BernieParent]

The system is double-posting a lot these days.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Cue the Comic Book Guy’s groans.

 

[dingbathero]

Cates again and again and again and again

 

[dingbathero]

Cates again and again and again and again

 

[wasup]

After the junior scrimmages, got to move Ginning and Cates up the ladder.

No , prove it to me in the regular season over an extended period of time not exhibition scrimmiages . Heck some of you guys try to evaluate in 3 on 3 development camp .

 

[Magua]

It depends. For some people it's their first sample of a player. Whether that's not a truly indicative sample, either way, is case by case.

For example, the first time we/I saw Laczynski was at the showcase post-draft, used in the same role as Cates. He was equally impressive in that role and drew buzz from us and others. I think Laczynski is a better offensive player, but we still had to wait to see what he did at OSU. And he looked even better there. Like Cates, he had strong USHL #s. Now, I had already seen Cates in the USHL ~3 times, so I knew he was this player. We'll see what he looks like at UMD with higher usage eventually (though his usage grew pretty high this week), and if he should go up in our estimation. But at the very least, I think he's the player we saw this week and was underrated by the fanbase before this showcase.

Ginning I'm less certain about. It doesn't have to be all negative, and he did pretty decent. But that's more a case where I still saw his flaws and, again, had seen him a fair share last year. That's where a few scrimmage games doesn't shake my evaluation too much.

 

[VladDrag]

No , prove it to me in the regular season over an extended period of time not exhibition scrimmiages . Heck some of you guys try to evaluate in 3 on 3 development camp .

I think evaluating prospects is fluid in nature, that's one of the reasons prospects rise and fall during the season. I think you can use these games as a measuring stick. It's not an end all be all, but it does provide information.

For example, this was the first time I saw Cates play, and I was impressed by him. Not only by his playing, but by his improved role throughout each game. Gaining the coaches trust is valuable, and can be difficult to do in such a short period. It shows, to me, his ability to be coached. Also, His ability to step into a difficult situation and actually perform speaks volumes to me, not just about his skill but about his work ethic and his mental preparation. I'll be watching him a bit closer than I would have if I didn't see him there.

 

[FLYguy3911]

The guys that tend to look the best in those games are generally the guys that play the most.

 

[tymed]

Cates looked really solid and flashed a lot to look forward to, really impressed with my first exposure to him. Imma show Sushko some love here though-he's already performed well on the same stage a year ago and has a nice skillset to push forward on as well.

We're into a solid group of depth prospects here who all have their own case going... Sushko, Cates, Twarynski, Bunny. It's hard enough putting them in order without considering the couple/few dmen in this range to boot. All I know forsure is that things are lookin real good.

 

[Provorov4Norris]

It’s crazy that when we go 20 deep there are still players that can potentially be NHLers. The depth is sick.

 

[dats81]

Sick depth. Good.

 

[Curufinwe]

It's too close to call this one early, so the next poll will start tomorrow afternoon.

 

[Appleyard]

Objective opinion on players can change too based on small things... if they become repeatable.

I will give the example of Bernhardt... he was a late pick but in draft+1 I thought the chance of him ever being an NHL Dman was low even if he was good for his age, as his NZ play was poor despite his good skill and shot in OZ and strength+leverage+tenacity in his own zone. He could not link the two together.

But over the space of a year he massively improved there, improved his skating as well... and now looks like he has a legit chance to be an NHLer given his skillset.

 

[Curufinwe]

It's too close to call this one early, so the next poll will start tomorrow afternoon.

Unless this one ends tied and I have to do a runoff.

 

[deadhead]

Objective opinion on players can change too based on small things... if they become repeatable.

I will give the example of Bernhardt... he was a late pick but in draft+1 I thought the chance of him ever being an NHL Dman was low even if he was good for his age, as his NZ play was poor despite his good skill and shot in OZ and strength+leverage+tenacity in his own zone. He could not link the two together.

But over the space of a year he massively improved there, improved his skating as well... and now looks like he has a legit chance to be an NHLer given his skillset.

Which is why I laugh at anyone who is sure what a player is going to become at 18, heck, even 22.
There's a reason they have coaches, weigh rooms, practice after practice, etc.
Now not every player responds, some are limited by genetics, some by lack of work ethic, some by lack of intelligence.
But part of the "process" is giving every player the best shot at raising their game, then weeding out the ones who can't or won't take advantage of that opportunity.
And part of scouting is identify the players most likely to respond to hard training and coaching.

 

[deadhead]

It depends. For some people it's their first sample of a player. Whether that's not a truly indicative sample, either way, is case by case.

Ginning I'm less certain about. It doesn't have to be all negative, and he did pretty decent. But that's more a case where I still saw his flaws and, again, had seen him a fair share last year. That's where a few scrimmage games doesn't shake my evaluation too much.

I saw enough of Ginning to see where he can be coached up, it'll be a lot easier to teach him to skate than Strome.