Prospect Info: 2019 top prospects #7

[Paul4587]

1. Zegras (not ranked)
2. Steel (-1)
3. Terry (-1)
4. Comtois (+2)
5. Lundestrom (-)
6. Jones (+2)

Last years results
2017 results
2016
2015

Surprised Jones took the last one and how unanimous it was given he IMO lacks the upside of some of the other guys on the board. I went for Tracey again this poll. Still a few quality guys left.

Click to read more...

 

[Goose of Reason]

Went with Dostal here. I think he has the highest upside of anyone left in terms of being an impact player.

 

[MMC]

Tracey

 

[Dryish]

Tracey, since I just barely had to pick Jones ahead of him even though I think his potential massively outshines Jones' one.

I'm not as high on Dostal quite yet. Goalies can look absolutely wonderful one year, then just stop development there and never progress. Until he proves he can really be a solid NHL-level goaltender, his stock isn't very high in my eyes. Larsson, Guhle, Mahura and probably even LaCombe all register above him on my chart.

 

[Duck Off]

Mahura for me, but Tracey would be my next pick so I’m good if he wins.

 

[duxfan1101]

I could pick Tracey here, but I would like to see what he does this season with a worse team, so I will temper my expectations with him at least for a little bit longer.

 

[mightyquack]

Dostal

 

[DigiDuck]

Dostal. I like what I've read/heard about him and seems like he's got the most upside.

 

[ShadowDuck]

I went with Guhle, but happy if Dostal takes this spot.

I need to see more from Tracey personally, he’s #9 for me

 

[Hockey Duckie]

1. Zegras (not ranked)
2. Steel (-1)
3. Terry (-1)
4. Comtois (+2)
5. Lundestrom (-)
6. Jones (+2)

Last years results
2017 results
2016
2015

Surprised Jones took the last one and how unanimous it was given he IMO lacks the upside of some of the other guys on the board. I went for Tracey again this poll. Still a few quality guys left.

Agreed. At least with Tracey, his mystery hasn't rubbed off the potential that some of us feel about Jones this past year. Tracey has shown to be a scorer as long as there's talent around him (Moosejaw and WJC-18).

 

[Trojans86]

1. Zegras (not ranked)
2. Steel (-1)
3. Terry (-1)
4. Comtois (+2)
5. Lundestrom (-)
6. Jones (+2)

Last years results
2017 results
2016
2015

Surprised Jones took the last one and how unanimous it was given he IMO lacks the upside of some of the other guys on the board. I went for Tracey again this poll. Still a few quality guys left.

Imo jones has an elite combo of size, speed and tenacity that gives him a very high floor. His ceiling is dependent on how much he can get his skills and IQ in the offensive zone. If he can make some big strides there then the sky is the limit for him. I feel like guys that are so physically dominant sometimes dont develop those skillsets because they can really on their physical tools. Kind of like Coglianos speed. He never developed any creativity or high end skill because he was used to being faster than everyone.

 

[TheGoodShepard1]

My 6 is exactly the same as the board's consensus, so I'll go with an off-the-board shout and take McLaughlin. Dude had a great second half of his freshman year at Minnesota and has offensive instincts galore. Though I wouldn't expect the freshman--->sophomore emergence that Terry had at Denver, I think he could be a prime candidate for a breakout season.

 

[dracom]

tougher choice here, since we haven't seen any of these guys in the NHL and the ones we have haven't exactly shown a ton of promise (Larsson, Guhle). Going to go with Tracey due to potential.

 

[eternalbedhead]

This one's a lot closer, but I went with Dostal. I'm really excited for him.

 

[HanSolo]

Tracey, since I just barely had to pick Jones ahead of him even though I think his potential massively outshines Jones' one.

I'm not as high on Dostal quite yet. Goalies can look absolutely wonderful one year, then just stop development there and never progress. Until he proves he can really be a solid NHL-level goaltender, his stock isn't very high in my eyes. Larsson, Guhle, Mahura and probably even LaCombe all register above him on my chart.

I feel the same way though I'd make an exception if he was as highly touted as Gibson and Vasilevski were. He's clearly not.

 

[Paul4587]

If it’s within 3 votes when the poll closes it’s going to a tiebreaker. There are enough others who have voted who can hopefully help decide it.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

Tracey, since I just barely had to pick Jones ahead of him even though I think his potential massively outshines Jones' one.

I'm not as high on Dostal quite yet. Goalies can look absolutely wonderful one year, then just stop development there and never progress. Until he proves he can really be a solid NHL-level goaltender, his stock isn't very high in my eyes. Larsson, Guhle, Mahura and probably even LaCombe all register above him on my chart.

I'm lost with this line of thinking. So everyone has potential. But goalies will be graded differently b/c their potential is inconsistent and their stock is only established once they're a solid NHL-level goaltender. At that point, aren't they NHL goaltenders and no longer prospects?

You go with Tracey, who has no NHL experience and rate him over Jones. There doesn't exist a sense of consistency with respect to prospects. I'll respect that you have two different standards for prospects, but I disagree with it b/c prospects are all about potential and they can change their potentiality year after year. Isn't that why we do prospect rankings every off-season?

 

[Exit Dose]

I've been going back and forth between Mahura and Dostal, and I'm back to favoring Dostal. I have pretty high expectations for both of them and Larsson. Then I'd go with Tracey and Morand, since those two have a little more bust potential with high reward.

 

[Dryish]

I'm lost with this line of thinking. So everyone has potential. But goalies will be graded differently b/c their potential is inconsistent and their stock is only established once they're a solid NHL-level goaltender. At that point, aren't they NHL goaltenders and no longer prospects?

You go with Tracey, who has no NHL experience and rate him over Jones. There doesn't exist a sense of consistency with respect to prospects. I'll respect that you have two different standards for prospects, but I disagree with it b/c prospects are all about potential and they can change their potentiality year after year. Isn't that why we do prospect rankings every off-season?

If you want to understand my logic, here's how I work. I look at prospects with one simple gauge in mind, honestly. That being, how much they can be reasonably expected to contribute to future success of the team. That can sort of simplistically be broken down to two constituent parts: how big of a contributor I expect a prospect to be, and how likely I think it is for a prospect to actually contribute.

In my ranking, Tracey is solidly above Jones, despite the fact that the latter has had decently successful NHL time, because I simply value his projected offensive ability above Jones' skillset regardless of NHL-readiness. And since there's little yet to suggest that he's not going to pan out, his projected capability outranks Jones' readiness as far as I'm concerned. Should that be put to question by next season or altogether proven wrong, trust me, his stock will take a massive plummet in my eyes. But so far so good, hence he's ahead.

Goalies, though, are a different kind of animal. Their stock is permanently lower in my eyes because of the second prospect contribution attribute. We just don't know if they'll develop well or not, and their development varies a lot more on a year-to-year basis than it does for skaters in my experience. Could be wrong, of course, I'm just a hobbyist and I don't really pretend to be an expert, so if someone marches in and shoves data in my face that proves me wrong I can reassess. But as it stands, I don't think it's as reasonable to assume that a goalie prospect that looks good one year stays on that course until he proves that he really does. Conversely, skater prospects get a lot more leeway because their development trajectories are more stable.

 

[AngelDuck]

Tracey. He's going to shoot up this list in the next year or so

 

[TopShelfWaterBottle]

Would love for him to get near the century mark but since his overager linemates are now gone who knows

 

[Hockey Duckie]

Goalies, though, are a different kind of animal. Their stock is permanently lower in my eyes because of the second prospect contribution attribute. We just don't know if they'll develop well or not, and their development varies a lot more on a year-to-year basis than it does for skaters in my experience. Could be wrong, of course, I'm just a hobbyist and I don't really pretend to be an expert, so if someone marches in and shoves data in my face that proves me wrong I can reassess. But as it stands, I don't think it's as reasonable to assume that a goalie prospect that looks good one year stays on that course until he proves that he really does. Conversely, skater prospects get a lot more leeway because their development trajectories are more stable.

Your initial threshold was goalies should prove to be "solid NHL-level goaltender". Did you just move the goal post to prove a goalie prospect looks good in two or more consecutive years? If that's so, then here's Dostal's stats: link.

Anyhow, with your condition about "contributing to the future success of the team", which I assume is with the Ducks only. If that's the case, then no goaltender should be ranked in the top 20 at all for the Ducks prospects because Gibson is under contract for the next eight seasons.

Again, I'll respect that you have two different standards for prospect grading. I disagree with it, but I'll respect it.

Here's a couple of articles about drafting goalies:

What Failure Rates Say About NHL Goalie Drafting

NHL Goaltending Scouting May Not Be as Bad as You Think

 

[Kalv]

Looks like Tracey will take this. Although I voted Dostal, I am fine with Tracey winning #7

He showed very intriguing tools and style last year, I do believe he can become a decent Top6 winger (obviously a lot to go). He has a very good hands and he hangs around the net. While he`s not the biggest guy in the world but he can be a very useful player if all goes right.
He`s very young for his draft year, he has potentially 2 WJCs coming up (maybe one if the Team Canada doesn`t decite to pick him despite not welcoming to prep camp)

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I actually like Tracey's upside potential over Jones. Tracey's scoring production in two different venues supports he can be high point producer, provided he has talent around him as well. The knock on Tracey is that he's reliant upon his older linemates at Moosejaw, but people don't bring up his WJC-18 production. That extra context matters.

I recalled how so many fans bashed the Ducks for drafting a defenseman who can't play defense because of his two seasons before getting drafted had a total of plus/minus rating of (- 60). But if you looked at his team, the whole team was in negative +/- ratings. LoL After he was drafted, the following two seasons at his junior club that defenseman had positive +/- ratings. That defenseman is Shea Theodore.

 

[pesko]

Going with the new toy.