HF Habs: 2022 HF Habs Prospect Rankings #7

[Nico Cauzuki]

Im going for potentiel so Hutson but Mailloux was very close

 

[Nicko999]

What,
we have a top 10 prospect pool right now

Everyone overvalue their prospect. I would rank it middle of the pack at the moment. Good depth but it lacks gamebreakers. No top pair D nor #1C and those are the thoughest to get/draft. Hard to consider the prospect pool of a rebuilding team "good" when it's missing those 2 things.

Things will change dramatically in 2023 hopefully.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Harris add norlinder

 

[KevSkillz4]

Who's a top 6 F or top 4 (let alone 2) D?

Slafkovsky potential to be a 1st line player.
Guhle (even top pairing potential), Mailloux, Hutson, Harris all potential to be top 4 d-man. Xhekaj and Fairbrother have potential to be great bottom D.
Farrell, Roy, Mesar, potential to be top 6 forward.

Beck, Heineman, Mysak, Ylonen, Kidney, Rohrer potential to be 3rd line//bottom 6 players, maybe more too.

Smilanic, Guindon, Bondi and more, looks not bad at all too.

Primeau, Dobes, Dichow, looks all really good.

 

[SlafySZN]

Thats crazy good.


Hutson has a much higher IQ, Mailloux a much bigger frame. Both are terribly talended.

Despite mailloux being taller and bigger, i’d say Hutson plays ‘’bigger’’ than Mailloux. Hutson won’t be able to be physical at the higher level but he plays with better compete level.

Slafkovsky potential to be a 1st line player.
Guhle (even top pairing potential), Mailloux, Hutson, Harris all potential to be top 4 d-man. Xhekaj and Fairbrother have potential to be great bottom D.
Farrell, Roy, Mesar, potential to be top 6 forward.

Beck, Heineman, Mysak, Ylonen, Kidney, Rohrer potential to be 3rd line//bottom 6 players, maybe more too.

Smilanic, Guindon, Bondi and more, looks not bad at all too.

Primeau, Dobes, Dichow, looks all really good.

Heineman 100% potential of a top 6 player.

Heineman is the kind of player who would fit anywhere in the line up i think. Roy is top 6 or bust.

 

[dkd]

Slafkovsky potential to be a 1st line player.
Guhle (even top pairing potential), Mailloux, Hutson, Harris all potential to be top 4 d-man. Xhekaj and Fairbrother have potential to be great bottom D.
Farrell, Roy, Mesar, potential to be top 6 forward.

Beck, Heineman, Mysak, Ylonen, Kidney, Rohrer potential to be 3rd line//bottom 6 players, maybe more too.

Smilanic, Guindon, Bondi and more, looks not bad at all too.

Primeau, Dobes, Dichow, looks all really good.

One thing I learned from this forum over the years is that our board overhypes the hell out of our prospects all the time. We'd be lucky if 3 of those mentioned above pan out to be decent NHL'rs.

 

[NotProkofievian]

I think this is Mailloux's time to shine. Tools are too good to pass up, we'll see what they amount to.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Damn, our prospect pool doesn't look good at all.

Your monitor is off.....turn it on and you will be able to see an extremely deep group where we have players outside of our top twenty who would be in some teams top 10.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

One thing I learned from this forum over the years is that our board overhypes the hell out of our prospects all the time. We'd be lucky if 3 of those mentioned above pan out to be decent NHL'rs.

One thing you should also learn is not to apply general truisms as an effective tool to compare separate groups. Why bother coming in with such generic drivel, are you going to stop at every other board to pronounce the same dystopian outlook.

Prospect pools are judged relative to other pools so why bother introducing a factor that has to be applied equally to every pool......it means absolutely nothing and has zero bearing on the relative strength of a group of prospects.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Everyone overvalue their prospect. I would rank it middle of the pack at the moment. Good depth but it lacks gamebreakers. No top pair D nor #1C and those are the thoughest to get/draft. Hard to consider the prospect pool of a rebuilding team "good" when it's missing those 2 things.

Things will change dramatically in 2023 hopefully.

Guhle is 100% a top pairing D prospect

 

[BaseballCoach]

Let's do a runoff

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

Who's a top 6 F or top 4 (let alone 2) D?

I know the answer but I won't tell you for 5 years...

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

Hutson for the 6th time lmao

 

[Domi JR]

Maillioux add Rohrer

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

One thing you should also learn is not to apply general truisms as an effective tool to compare separate groups. Why bother coming in with such generic drivel, are you going to stop at every other board to pronounce the same dystopian outlook.

Prospect pools are judged relative to other pools so why bother introducing a factor that has to be applied equally to every pool......it means absolutely nothing and has zero bearing on the relative strength of a group of prospects.

Great post.

One trend I've noticed with prospects is that people discount as failures any player who isn't a long-term top-6 forward or top-4 defenseman, which becomes a fairly difficult criteria by which to judge players. I mean there are only what 180 top 6 forwards a year and 120 top-4 dmen? And then because there is lots of change maybe only half or MAYBE 2/3rds of them stay at that level for at least 4 years. I would guess actually it might even be less than half, but even using the optimistic scenario that 2/3s do, that's 120 F and 80 dmen. You'd have to divide that over maybe 15 draft classes to account for different draft years. Is 15 enough I'm not even sure but whatever if we'll go with 15 you have 5 top 4 dmen and 8 top 6 forwards per draft class. So that means that out of the 225 players drafted per year, all but 14 of them are busts using that criteria. I know I haven't included goalies so let's add 1 goalie hit per year and call it 15/225 = not bust. And that includes the top 15 players selected, which are bound to have quite a lot of those 15 players. I find that way of valuing prospects (and draft classes) extremely harsh, and it's no wonder people who propose such standards are then ALWAYS underwhelmed by prospect development.

Personally I use GPs as a metric to evaluate drafts. I find it's the easiest and while not perfect, it provides quite an amazing amount of info. It allows me to view more prospects as successful, which I think is more accurate. Because late-round picks who turn into NHL regulars are actually not all that common and are pretty big success stories.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

Let's do a runoff

I'd be down for that

 

[HabsSlappy]

Add Norlinder

 

[FrankMTL]

Tough pick...I'm really torn between Mailloux and Hutson.

I'll go Mailloux, but to be honest they're somewhat interchangeable for me.

 

[Nicko999]

Guhle is 100% a top pairing D prospect

Not enough offense for that. I believe he's more of a 2nd pair guy.

 

[Treb]

Not enough offense for that. I believe he's more of a 2nd pair guy.

Kaiden Guhle: 100 pts in 188 games
Shea Weber: 91 pts in 190 games

 

[NotProkofievian]

Let's do a runoff

Maybe even a dance off.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Logan Mailloux.

Add Struble.

 

[Mrb1p]

Kaiden Guhle: 100 pts in 188 games
Shea Weber: 91 pts in 190 games

Weber is a great exception to that rule, and we all know Guhle doesnt have the generational shot Weber had.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'll be fighting this battle for awhile, I know.. but its Jakub Dobes. His numbers are even more impressive when you realize his team just gave out breakaways and odd man rushes like candy.

Add Norlinder.

You could be right here. Watching Dobes he looks great, like a Price-lite.

After Mailloux, I'd love to see Dobes and Primeau go back-to-back. Primeau proved his mental fortitude last spring, something I value highly in a goalie.

 

[Nicko999]

Kaiden Guhle: 100 pts in 188 games
Shea Weber: 91 pts in 190 games

That would be the best case scenario but like we know, not everyone develops the same. There is no such things as 100% in prospects as a previous poster was referring to.

The more likely scenario would be a #3 D-man.