Prospect Info: 2019-2020 Senators Prospects Watch

[Samsquanch]

People are entitled to their opinion. But there's no reason to get emotional about it. It's really debating between prospects who probably won't ever make the NHL. Oh no, we picked this guy who was ranked 45, there was a guy ranked 30 available, what a terrible pick, I'm so upset right now. Like grow up.

For sure people are entitled to their own opinion. It's obviously encouraged on a message board.

But theres a very vocal group of posters that have already expressed their opinions that they didnt like some of our picks, time and time again. And then again. And then again.



How long do we have to continue listening to these posts without saying "it's time to move on bud", and start talking about our own prospects?

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Players who have scored 50 goals in their 17 year old season in the past 20 years:
Alex Debrincat
Jeff Skinner
John Tavares
Steven Stamkos

"no elite upside"

Yep. Pretty disingenuous argument. He has elite potential. That's not really an argument. The argument is around whether that potential can be fulfilled or why it won't be.

The "enlightened centrists" just love to play the appeal to authority card on these picks when we're witnessing an absolute disaster I managment. If we had the ability to draft these great players out of no where, maybe we'd have some on our roster. Just saying. When we do get them, we slander them and trade them for dirt.

 

[Gil Gunderson]

Even if he’s unlikely to reach his potential, I’d rather have a 20% shot of someone becoming a 70-80 player than a 60% shot of someone becoming a middle-six forward.

 

[Hale The Villain]

While Pinto could easily end up an NHLer, and potentially a decent one at that, he wasn't the right pick for this team at 32.

We already have a log jam of young forwards at the AHL level that likely project as bottom 6 guys: Norris, Formenton, Abramov, Chlapik, Davidsson, Veronneau, Kelly. We also have 9 picks in the top 2 rounds over the next 2 years.

Why use a high 2nd on a guy who's a pretty safe bet to play but doesn't have high-end upside? We already have a ton of those guys and a limited number of spots. This isn't even taking into consideration that decent bottom 6 guys are available every free agency often without having to overpay like with the premium free agents.

Sens bunted taking Pinto at 32 when we should have went for a home run with a guy like Kaliyev/Brink/Afanasyev/Lavoie.

 

[Samsquanch]

The "enlightened centrists" just love to play the appeal to authority card on these picks when we're witnessing an absolute disaster I managment. If we had the ability to draft these great players out of no where, maybe we'd have some on our roster. Just saying. When we do get them, we slander them and trade them for dirt.

Wow and I'm being labelled as the emotional one in here. Classic..

Honestly guys I thought we were going to keep prospect chat about the actual prospects, and not make it an everlasting rant session that feels more like a recovery group for PTSD victims than it does a place to track our prospects.

It's really getting old hearing the same arguments every single time about how you feel like this team has dropped the ball. We get it. Everything sucks and we are dummies for having hope.

We arent going to change and neither will you. But the least you can do is appreciate the basic rules we had all agreed upon.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

While Pinto could easily end up an NHLer, and potentially a decent one at that, he wasn't the right pick for this team at 32.

We already have a log jam of young forwards at the AHL level that likely project as bottom 6 guys: Norris, Formenton, Abramov, Chlapik, Davidsson, Veronneau, Kelly. We also have 9 picks in the top 2 rounds over the next 2 years.

Why use a high 2nd on a guy who's a pretty safe bet to play but doesn't have high-end upside? We already have a ton of those guys and a limited number of spots. This isn't even taking into consideration that decent bottom 6 guys are available every free agency often without having to overpay like with the premium free agents.

Sens bunted taking Pinto at 32 when we should have went for a home run with a guy like Kaliyev/Brink/Afanasyev/Lavoie.

I think this is what a lot of us think. Team felt different .,. but they are obviously beyond any criticism at any level by some . Its not even OK to have this kind of opinion apparently .. its being upset. Its not what management did, those that disagree with the decision go into an immediate emo frenzy that either causes them to vent on a bb or breakdown completely .

Cool headed people see the way clearly . As clearly as Pierre Dorion, so if you catch yourself not aligning with Mr. Dorion's way of thinking .. you better check yourself.

 

[Runback]

Wow and I'm being labelled as the emotional one in here. Classic..

Honestly guys I thought we were going to keep prospect chat about the actual prospects, and not make it an everlasting rant session that feels more like a recovery group for PTSD victims than it does a place to track our prospects.

It's really getting old hearing the same arguments every single time about how you feel like this team has dropped the ball. We get it. Everything sucks and we are dummies for having hope.

We arent going to change and neither will you. But the least you can do is appreciate the basic rules we had all agreed upon.

Well said . Thank you.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Let’s all try keep this thread on topic and stop the banter regarding opinions, please.

 

[aragorn]

I disagree with most on Norris, I think this guy will be a top six player whether at centre or LW remains to be seen but it seems like they are grooming him to be a centre. We have a pretty good idea who they think the future centres will be on this team, it just remains to be seen which line they eventually centre. L. Brown, White & Norris should all end up as this team's three top centres with White & Norris being interchangeable IMO.

The GM now has to find the right players to compliment these three guys & they have started if these young guys pan out. Tkachuk, Formenton & Batherson IMO are the only three forwards so far that have shown they can be future forwards on this team. I expect that a couple more like Pinto & Gruden could also make it at some point. And I expect they could end up with at least two more good forwards in the 2020 draft as well as another couple of good players in the 2021 draft. They also may already have the players for a good 4th line depending on what they want on that line ... speed, energy, toughness, size, skill or some combination of everything.

2020 draft - L. Brown - Batherson
Tkachuk - White - 2021 draft
Formenton - Norris - Pinto

 

[MatchesMalone]

Players who have scored 50 goals in their 17 year old season in the past 20 years:
Alex Debrincat
Jeff Skinner
John Tavares
Steven Stamkos

"no elite upside"

Would you consider Skinner "elite"? And while I don't mean to imply you're cherry-picking your stats, because of course 50 goals is a common milestone, but if you drop the limit by just one goal, you can include Nail Yakupov in that list. Then if you keep the 49 goal limit and include the other two CHL leagues, you could add Steve Bernier and Hunter Shinkaruk to the list.

Yep. Pretty disingenuous argument. He has elite potential. That's not really an argument. The argument is around whether that potential can be fulfilled or why it won't be.

I can see why you would think this, but not the case. I had a philosophy professor, Phil Dwyer, I've already mentioned him on this forum once or twice but he was my favorite prof and one of my favorite people. He used to teach this behaviorist approach to argumentation - that using terms like "I think" or "I believe" is essentially meaningless and all you're really doing is "hedging your philosophical bets" and weakening your claim by appearing unsure. You're better off to just state your opinion matter-of-factly, and if you're proven wrong later, then accept that you were wrong. As long as you're right most of the time then being blatantly wrong on occasion is no big deal.

So yeah, rather than saying something like "the odds of Kaliyev being elite are extremely low" or "I would be shocked if Kaliyev is an elite NHL player" I just said he has no elite upside. Do I honestly believe it is a 0% chance? Of course not. Do I believe the odds are low enough to be worth disregarding altogether? Yes.

Nothing disingenuous here, just my honest opinion. As I've said earlier in this thread, in my opinion, the absolute best case scenario for Kaliyev is something like Mike Hoffman. Maybe "elite" specifically as a powerplay specialist, but not overall as a player. Might score a lot on the powerplay, and maybe even score a lot at even strength if he's surrounded by good players, but my belief is that to qualify as an elite player you have to be able to drive an offensive line and make players around you better.

Guys like Hoffman rely too much on their teammates to create their scoring chances, and are negative corsi influencers because they're not good enough in their own zone and in transition. They can be considered very good players, but not elite.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Would you consider Skinner "elite"? And while I don't mean to imply you're cherry-picking your stats, because of course 50 goals is a common milestone, but if you drop the limit by just one goal, you can include Nail Yakupov in that list. Then if you keep the 49 goal limit and include the other two CHL leagues, you could add Steve Bernier and Hunter Shinkaruk to the list.



I can see why you would think this, but not the case. I had a philosophy professor, Phil Dwyer, I've already mentioned him on this forum once or twice but he was my favorite prof and one of my favorite people. He used to teach this behaviorist approach to argumentation - that using terms like "I think" or "I believe" is essentially meaningless and all you're really doing is "hedging your philosophical bets" and weakening your claim by appearing unsure. You're better off to just state your opinion matter-of-factly, and if you're proven wrong later, then accept that you were wrong. As long as you're right most of the time then being blatantly wrong on occasion is no big deal.

So yeah, rather than saying something like "the odds of Kaliyev being elite are extremely low" or "I would be shocked if Kaliyev is an elite NHL player" I just said he has no elite upside. Do I honestly believe it is a 0% chance? Of course not. Do I believe the odds are low enough to be worth disregarding altogether? Yes.

Nothing disingenuous here, just my honest opinion. As I've said earlier in this thread, in my opinion, the absolute best case scenario for Kaliyev is something like Mike Hoffman. Maybe "elite" specifically as a powerplay specialist, but not overall as a player. Might score a lot on the powerplay, and maybe even score a lot at even strength if he's surrounded by good players, but my belief is that to qualify as an elite player you have to be able to drive an offensive line and make players around you better.

Guys like Hoffman rely too much on their teammates to create their scoring chances, and are negative corsi influencers because they're not good enough in their own zone and in transition. They can be considered very good players, but not elite.

Good post I think the biggest issue in regards to the philosophical argument is the ability to admit being wrong later.

This I think is the biggest stumbling block for many people. It’s why they need to hedge their bets, so that they can walk back from the position without giving much in the way of admittance.

Interestingly, to me at least, is that some of the reluctance to admitting being wrong seems to come form outside parties. It’s as though there is something wrong with being wrong sometimes, it’s like it somehow serves to undermine ones credibility and should be avoided at all costs, instead of it being a natural, and yet hopefully only an occasional, outcome of frequent debate. It’s ok to lose a fight here and there, a game here and there, but don’t you dare admit to losing an argument!

Thanks for providing that thought path exercise, I enjoyed it.

 

[God Says No]

Would you consider Skinner "elite"? And while I don't mean to imply you're cherry-picking your stats, because of course 50 goals is a common milestone, but if you drop the limit by just one goal, you can include Nail Yakupov in that list. Then if you keep the 49 goal limit and include the other two CHL leagues, you could add Steve Bernier and Hunter Shinkaruk to the list.



I can see why you would think this, but not the case. I had a philosophy professor, Phil Dwyer, I've already mentioned him on this forum once or twice but he was my favorite prof and one of my favorite people. He used to teach this behaviorist approach to argumentation - that using terms like "I think" or "I believe" is essentially meaningless and all you're really doing is "hedging your philosophical bets" and weakening your claim by appearing unsure. You're better off to just state your opinion matter-of-factly, and if you're proven wrong later, then accept that you were wrong. As long as you're right most of the time then being blatantly wrong on occasion is no big deal.

So yeah, rather than saying something like "the odds of Kaliyev being elite are extremely low" or "I would be shocked if Kaliyev is an elite NHL player" I just said he has no elite upside. Do I honestly believe it is a 0% chance? Of course not. Do I believe the odds are low enough to be worth disregarding altogether? Yes.

Nothing disingenuous here, just my honest opinion. As I've said earlier in this thread, in my opinion, the absolute best case scenario for Kaliyev is something like Mike Hoffman. Maybe "elite" specifically as a powerplay specialist, but not overall as a player. Might score a lot on the powerplay, and maybe even score a lot at even strength if he's surrounded by good players, but my belief is that to qualify as an elite player you have to be able to drive an offensive line and make players around you better.

Guys like Hoffman rely too much on their teammates to create their scoring chances, and are negative corsi influencers because they're not good enough in their own zone and in transition. They can be considered very good players, but not elite.

Well, you used "I believe" on your post so I guess pot meet kettle. The point is that I don't think for the most part people use those phrases to hedge their bets. It's simply how they phrase things unconsciously. This is a forum where we share our thoughts, hence people will use phrases like "I believe" and "I think". Nothing wrong with that.

Now to matter at hands. The last bolded part is pretty much wrong. Hoffman and players like him (elite offensive players) CAN create their own scoring chances. That's why they are called elite OFFENSIVE players. They have the skating/shot/skill to turn something out of nothing, and do not rely on their team mates as much as an average player. This leads us to Kaliev. He is exactly the kind of upside player people are upset we are not taking a chance on in the second round. He's a second round pick that seems to have top 10 skill. Pinto on the other hand is trending towards a bottom six player which most likely is looking like a 4th line player, which seemed to be a reach where we picked him. If he was picked in the 3rd or 4th round, most people would not have a problem with the pick. But we picked him in the second, and not only that a high second round pick. Hence the grief. I still think it was a bad pick and our overall draft wasn't very good.

 

[MatchesMalone]

While Pinto could easily end up an NHLer, and potentially a decent one at that, he wasn't the right pick for this team at 32.

We already have a log jam of young forwards at the AHL level that likely project as bottom 6 guys: Norris, Formenton, Abramov, Chlapik, Davidsson, Veronneau, Kelly. We also have 9 picks in the top 2 rounds over the next 2 years.

Why use a high 2nd on a guy who's a pretty safe bet to play but doesn't have high-end upside? We already have a ton of those guys and a limited number of spots. This isn't even taking into consideration that decent bottom 6 guys are available every free agency often without having to overpay like with the premium free agents.

Sens bunted taking Pinto at 32 when we should have went for a home run with a guy like Kaliyev/Brink/Afanasyev/Lavoie.

I don't disagree with the general sentiment here. We would have been better off with more of a boom-or-bust pick, but I disagree with the specifics. I don't believe most of the guys you named have a lot of "boom" potential, outside of Brink.

Better boom/bust options would have been Höglander, Kochetkov, Dorofeyev.

 

[BondraTime]

Dorofeyev is a guy I wanted with our 1st, if it came to losing out on the guys who did in fact go before us.

We can now put to bed that we are not taking Russians because of Melnyk, seeing we have acquired 4 in the past 8 months.

Now we know it has nothing to do with Melnyk’s Ukraine/Russia stance, as was widely believed, but instead is because we have no scouts in Russia. The Russian junior leagues will not yield any players for us, which is unfortunate because high end players (like Dorofeyev) are being selected much later in drafts, and providing a huge skill infusion 4-5 years down the line. That seems like something the Sens desperately need.

The Sens need to invest in a Russian based scout, who can watch the KHL and MHL, the MHL is the league where we can find legit star talented players later in the drafts.

 

[MatchesMalone]

Well, you used "I believe" on your post so I guess pot meet kettle.

Lol. Good one.

The point is that I don't think for the most part people use those phrases to hedge their bets. It's simply how they phrase things unconsciously. This is a forum where we share our thoughts, hence people will use phrases like "I believe" and "I think". Nothing wrong with that.

You missed my point. I never said there was anything wrong with it. Was just explaining why I stated my opinion on Kaliyev so straightforwardly. If he had just disagreed with me I wouldn't have bothered, but since he said I was being disingenuous I felt compelled to explain myself.

Wait. Do people seriously consider Hoffman elite? I honestly thought I was making a pretty uncontentious and innocuous claim there. No way Hoffman can be considered elite by any standard? I mean, I've noticed people are throwing around the "generational" tag pretty willy-nilly with prospects now days, so I guess the trickledown effect would lead to every such designation getting overused?

 

[God Says No]

Wait. Do people seriously consider Hoffman elite? I honestly thought I was making a pretty uncontentious and innocuous claim there. No way Hoffman can be considered elite by any standard? I mean, I've noticed people are throwing around the "generational" tag pretty willy-nilly with prospects now days, so I guess the trickledown effect would lead to every such designation getting overused?

Hoffman has an elite release. That is without a question. Overall, he's just a very good player since his other warts bring him down. So no, not elite, but a notch below that offensively. It still bares the point that players like Hoffman can create their own
offense, and not rely on team mates, which contradicts what you were saying.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[Sentron5000]

Good post I think the biggest issue in regards to the philosophical argument is the ability to admit being wrong later.

This I think is the biggest stumbling block for many people. It’s why they need to hedge their bets, so that they can walk back from the position without giving much in the way of admittance.

Interestingly, to me at least, is that some of the reluctance to admitting being wrong seems to come form outside parties. It’s as though there is something wrong with being wrong sometimes, it’s like it somehow serves to undermine ones credibility and should be avoided at all costs, instead of it being a natural, and yet hopefully only an occasional, outcome of frequent debate. It’s ok to lose a fight here and there, a game here and there, but don’t you dare admit to losing an argument!

Thanks for providing that thought path exercise, I enjoyed it.

Nothing is 100% certain in an uncertain world. Anyone who tells you so is fooling themselves. If you are never wrong, you haven't taken enough risks in life. Better to think in terms of probability. A good book on the subject is Thinking in Bets by Annie Duke if you want to read more on the subject.

 

[MatchesMalone]

Hoffman has an elite release. That is without a question. Overall, he's just a very good player since his other warts bring him down. So no, not elite, but a notch below that offensively. It still bares the point that players like Hoffman can create their own
offense, and not rely on team mates, which contradicts what you were saying.

"Can create his own offense" is a pretty relative term. Any good NHL player can create some offense sometimes at some quality. I just don't think Hoffman does it at an elite level with any consistency. Think of players you would call elite. Panarin, Kane, McDavid, Rantanen, Crosby, Karlsson, Stone. Then think of Hoffman. 70 points last year but he played an awful lot with Barkov and Huberdeau.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

'He’ll be one of the best players in the world': Kings...

 

[Ice-Tray]

Nothing is 100% certain in an uncertain world. Anyone who tells you so is fooling themselves. If you are never wrong, you haven't taken enough risks in life. Better to think in terms of probability. A good book on the subject is Thinking in Bets by Annie Duke if you want to read more on the subject.

Thanks, I’ll look it up!

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

'He’ll be one of the best players in the world': Kings...

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Kaliyev is a sick player, no pushback from me there, but that has to be the least transferable skill to the NHL level.

Pinto on the other hand is trending towards a bottom six player which most likely is looking like a 4th line player, which seemed to be a reach where we picked him. If he was picked in the 3rd or 4th round, most people would not have a problem with the pick. But we picked him in the second, and not only that a high second round pick. Hence the grief. I still think it was a bad pick and our overall draft wasn't very good.

What on earth suggests that Pinto will be a 4th line player? He was a top player as a rookie in the USHL, produced similarly to Afanasyev & Mastosimone (and past players like N. Schmaltz & M. Pacioretty), he was by far the best player on his very good team in the playoffs, he has started out very well on a college team that is famous for not trusting rookies, he's a late bloomer, big kid, good on both sides of the puck.... so please, give me one reason why he's likely looking like a 4th line player???

 

[Micklebot]

"Can create his own offense" is a pretty relative term. Any good NHL player can create some offense sometimes at some quality. I just don't think Hoffman does it at an elite level with any consistency. Think of players you would call elite. Panarin, Kane, McDavid, Rantanen, Crosby, Karlsson, Stone. Then think of Hoffman. 70 points last year but he played an awful lot with Barkov and Huberdeau.

He spent more time without them than he did with them at ES, and I beleive his production was actually better with Trocheck than with Barkov.

I think it's a mistake to suggest that Hoffman's production was the product of Barkov and/or Huberdeau, at least at 5v5. On the PP on the other hand, he's more of a finisher as opposed to somebody generating the offensive chances, though his presence opens things up for everyone as opposition need to be aware of his one timer.

Having said that, I agree I wouldn't call him elite, but I do think he is someone that creates his own offense and isn't reliant on others. If anything, I'd argue that was always his issue; he didn't take advantage of the players he was with as much as you'd like from an elite player.

 

[Micklebot]

...
What on earth suggests that Pinto will be a 4th line player? He was a top player as a rookie in the USHL, produced similarly to Afanasyev & Mastosimone (and past players like N. Schmaltz & M. Pacioretty), he was by far the best player on his very good team in the playoffs, he has started out very well on a college team that is famous for not trusting rookies, he's a late bloomer, big kid, good on both sides of the puck.... so please, give me one reason why he's likely looking like a 4th line player???

I'd like to see more of Pinto before trying to judge what his future holds. I saw very little of him leading into the draft (completely off my radar) and as a late bloomer, I have a hard time trusting write ups that may be based on early viewings of him prior to him finding his groove.

This year will be a lot more telling of what to expect with him imo. Crossing my fingers, because I really wanted one of Kaliyev, Dorofeyev or Anfanasyev with that pick. Will be interesting to see how they all do along with some other guys like Lavoie and Brink who many were high on (I'd have been happy with any of these guys).