Prospect Info: 2018-19 Flyers Prospects - Top 30 SKATERS, #4

[Jray42]

Voted JOB but I'm not crazy about anyone left to be honest.

Talk about being spoiled recently eh?

 

[CodyTheHuman]

I wish I loved something as much as you love little Olle.

Spoiler

I haven't actually voted for him yet. I'm just shitposting.

 

[wasup]

Hey i see some bunny love on there . I wonder who his secret admirer is ???

 

[deadhead]

The problem with Ratcliffe is really tall guys are harder to project.
Most are goalies or defensemen, only a few wingers 6'5 or taller.
There may be something to taller players taking longer, but I haven't seen a definitive study.

One comparable might be Wheeler, he went #5, but wasn't even able to break into the NHL until he was 22, and while he had a solid first three seasons, didn't break out until he was 25 - which is old for a top 10 pick.

Brian Boyle was #26, he didn't break out until he was 26 years old
Bordeleau was a 4th rd pick who didn't get to the NHL until 26, didn't do much once he got there.
Bjugstad was #19, he made the NHL at 21, had a decent two years, struggled for two years, and took a step up at 25

Even among the defensemen:
Hedman #2, made the NHL at 19, break out season was 23
Oleksiak #16, really didn't win a steady job until last season at age 25
Hall Gill made the NHL at 22
Andrej Sustr was a starter at 23
Tyler Myers #12, started at 19, up and down, up at 26
Joe Finley #27, never made it other than a cup of coffee
Chara #56, started at 21, became a solid player at 24

 

[Stizzle]

Rubtsov dropped a bit on my list. I can't totally discredit what I saw this year. Turning on a Bathurst game during the regular season was flat depressing. Just regularly a lifeless performance.

 

[Magua]

I will attempt to be brief and probably fail miserably.

I agree with most of the individual evaluations here. I just rank my prospects a little differently. I vote almost strictly on realistic upside, which I would define as reasonably positive development but not everything going sunshine and rainbows. It’s basically impossible for me to move a guy down a tier for injuries short of something undeniably a problem. Myers’ issues could influence his ranking within my top tier of 2, but could not drop him to 3, etc.

I have this a tier of JOB, Rubtsov, and Allison. These are the guys I’ve seen spurts from that give me higher hope than the rest, but all still have serious issues that need to be improved/corrected for an ideal Middle 6er. Of course I’m most fluid on JOB because I couldn’t tell you what translates well from NE High School tape, but any ordering here I wouldn’t object to at all. I easily could have gone JOB, but then that’s just another vote with no discussion to be had.

Depending on the day you ask me, I might tack Ratcliffe onto the tail end or have him down one with Laczynski/Vorobyev, or even in the middle on his own. That’s a turnaround for me on Ratcliffe too, but I see terms like top-line upside thrown around and I’ve just never seen that player. If everything goes quite well, that’s a quality Middle 6 Wing. If I have a Wing and a Center pretty close, I’m more often than not going with the latter. It gets tricky in situations like Rubtsov and JOB of course, but etc.

Are we ranking differently? I'm ranking based on who I think has the best realistic shot to have the best career here, or if not career, the room to thrive and build value. It's not a short-term ranking. A player like Rubtsov has a year like he did -- and tbf 2016 was small sample -- it's hard to not reconsider what his ceiling is here, especially since Patrick and Frost were drafted afterwards. Now, O'Brien and Farabee (if Rubtsov perhaps plays LW, which is up in the air, but I believe we both agree it would be better for him). Those are hurdles.

It's just the nature of things that if Rubtsov actually had something approaching the year we thought he'd have, he would likely be in the top group still. But he didn't, and it at least opens up uncertainty. I'd sooner call this past season NOT a "reasonably positive development," to use your language. To not rank him far behind is still an acknowledgment of his talent and a willingness to give him a mulligan and bet on the long-term. Like I said, I have him on a tier with the names to follow. If you want to group JOB there due to question marks, I can't much argue, though I'd distinguish questions from concerns. I've been vocal defending Rubtsov this year, so I don't want to go overboard criticizing him.

Basically, I don't have anyone I really want to rank 5/6 in a runaway. Hockey IQ is my #1 thing/thang, and Allison is significantly behind the others to me there or he'd be the one (and likely is in the poll). He has production in a tough league and loud tools, so I do get it. Rubtsov had a poor year but the best skill package. Laczynski and Vorobyev I don't think have the usage ceiling here, though I'll still rank them higher than most. Ratcliffe? I guess he's some middle ground between Allison and Rubtsov in that he was productive, is reasonably intelligent, doesn't have their skill, but I can't really say anything negative about him. I do think he has 45-55 point potential, and his PP work shouldn't be undersold in his potential. Future PP ability/role is important to me in projecting realistic upside.

 

[Flyerfan13]

I voted Allison I think he is going to be a great power forward for us.

 

[Outlaw Samurai]

JOB

 

[Young Sandwich]

I'm not feeling the JOB love at #4. I think his ceiling and floor or too speculative to put ahead of a guy like Ratcliffe or Allison (or even Rubstov or Vorobyov). For me anyway, I am just concerned about the competition that he played against. That will be quickly assuaged by a good showing at Providence, but I think for me he is going to be at the highest #6 behind Ratcliffe and Allison. It seems like even the most common projections for JOB are a middle sixer. Looking at a guy like Ratcliffe or Allison that has the potential to be a top six guy, I just can't put him ahead of them.

If he wows at Providence, then this will obviously change that, but I don't even think we are going to see that because my understanding is that Providence plays a pretty underwhelming and defensive style (please correct me if I am wrong about that because I am just basing off of a couple random blurbs I've read about the team so this could be wholly incorrect).

bOOb

 

[flyersfan187]

Voted for JOB just on potential because he can be a special player but Rubstov I'm still very high on and I hope he plays strictly wing in the AHL to work on becoming more aggressive.

 

[MarAlain MongYeo]

Allison vs Ratcliffe may take weeks to decide

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

I think after this poll, things should get interesting.

 

[Stizzle]

Allison vs Ratcliffe may take weeks to decide

Tanner Laczynski is the Rodney Dangerfield of Flyers power forward prospects.

 

[kelmitchell]

I also think ratcliffe

 

[dingbathero]

I get it O'B is young.... but over Vorobyev or others..... wow.

 

[sa cyred]

I get it O'B is young.... but over Vorobyev or others..... wow.

Depends on what you view as a top prospect? If you value closer to NHL and more of a sure thing in a safer sense sure. But OB’s skill is top notch. If he hits like most hope he can, he might even be #1 on this list. The kids skill is crazy and while it was only development camp most came away impressed.

College is a different beast. I’m hopeful though because of his smarts to figure it out

 

[Philly Fanatik]

Rubstov will be a very steady versatile two way forward with the Flyers...
He draws a comparison to Frans Neilsen!

 

[Curufinwe]

I hope he’s great in the shootout like Frans.

 

[pit]

I think after this poll, things should get interesting.

I think this one is interesting as well. It's the start of the second tier and there is so much possibility in a number of different prospects around here with medium to high floors and unknown ceilings.

 

[FlyTimmo]

I get it O'B is young.... but over Vorobyev or others..... wow.

It shouldn't be a "....wow". It just means people value upside more than floor.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Some look at it as “you haven’t proven what you can’t be yet” while others look at it as “you haven’t proven what you can be yet”.

In Rubtsov’s & Vorobyev’s they’re looking more like B/C prospects at this point.

 

[wankstifier]

Tanner Laczynski is the Rodney Dangerfield of Flyers power forward prospects.

That's because his team is a drag.

 

[Magua]

Tanner Laczynski is the Rodney Dangerfield of Flyers power forward prospects.

You mean speedy undersized prospects.

 

[Magua]

That's because his team is a drag.

But he's the best part of that team I probably won't watch this season. It's like Ratcliffe and Guelph. Except OSU somehow lucked their way to the Frozen Four. f*** if I know. Being a re-entry 6th rounder + RW is more like it. We definitely hold him in higher esteem here than elsewhere or were earlier hyping him up (as we often are!); the fact he's top 10 (maybe?) in our polling is quite the compliment still.

If he moved his f***ing feet more, I'd more seriously mull voting him in at #5 or 6. I had him #5 in the winter. He's not a bad skater in stride, but he's got a case of cement feet and tippy toes when not in stride. I'd rather have seen him turn pro for plenty of reasons (duh), but working more with a better skating coach is important.

 

[Foggy14]

I went Ratty.

His projection as an impactful top-line player in a few years is a bit more convincing to me.

We'll see.