Actually that would be a fantastic line Moldenhauer in the middle and Delic and Musty on the wings. Musty and Moldenhauer are the star two man team from NJ Avalanche and Delic and Moldenhauer played on the Titans together for three years and has been playing in Slavic Europe this year. That line in two years is an NHL bound line!!!
American Prospect Update Thread
- Thread starter William H Bonney
- Start date
Actually that would be a fantastic line Moldenhauer in the middle and Delic and Musty on the wings. Musty and Moldenhauer are the star two man team from NJ Avalanche and Delic and Moldenhauer played on the Titans together for three years and has been playing in Slavic Europe this year. That line in two years is an NHL bound line!!!
Yeah hopefully we don’t make a habit of it. Eiserman would be in the QMJHL territory correct? Can’t think of any too New England kid opting for the Q. Or has being at shattuck long enough made him eligible for the WHL? I don’t think so.
Dux917
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2018
- 506
- 604
Agree. Much more a fan of them going to play NCAA hockey.
OHL is the only real problem, as there are simply less players in the WHL territory and most New England kids don't/won't to go to Quebec and play in the QMJHL.
If the OHL signs up a younger player that's one thing, but when they swoop in a grab a player that has already committed to a college, etc - thats tough
Last edited:
William H Bonney
Registered User
I think USAH should worry less about monopolizing its talent with the NTDP and more about improving its depth to a point where guys like Musty can go #1 overall in the OHL draft and the NTDP can still build a strong team. That's another important step for the program where these events aren't incompatible, but instead complimentary.
William H Bonney
Registered User
Ryan Van Horne
aka Scribe
As a Massachusetts kid, yes, he is in the Q territory and I would be shocked if any team was able to get him to give up the NTDP and college route. There have been so few high-profile Mass. products that have chosen the Q, I wouldn't need all the fingers on one hand to count them -- and none in this century have been as good as Eiserman. Jeremy Roenick is the best Mass. kid to ever play in the Q, and Keith Yandle is the best one that comes to mind in the last 20 years, with Jimmy Sharrow and Conor Garland being some others. (Adam Erne is a Connecticut kid.) Of course, the best American to ever play in the Q was Pat LaFontaine, but he was a St. Louis kid who came through the Detroit pipeline before the CHL carved up the States into regions for each of their three leagues.
EDIT: Eiserman has not committed to a college yet, as far as I can tell.
Last edited:
William H Bonney
Registered User
No. He's too young to commit to an NCAA program.
His family has NCAA D1 ties though. His dad and one of his brothers briefly played at UMass-Lowell and Shane played at UNH.
Ryan Van Horne
aka Scribe
Sorry, my mistake. I got him and Will Smith mixed up. Smith, a 2023 eligible, is committed to Northeastern. I don't think Eiserman is committed yet because I can't find any reference to him doing go. (I'll amend my post above.)
In your opinion, which 2005 players have the most potential? And which crop ntdp is more talented 2004 or 2005?
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
I don’t know the answer to your first question, but will try to answer your second question. It seems like there’s near unanimous agreement that the 2004 crop is one of the best in a long time and there’s a lot less excitement about the 2005 crop.
Last edited:
William H Bonney
Registered User
It's hard to compare them. The '04s had the pre-COVID world for a lot easier scouting and they also had the high profile YOGs.
It really just depends on how the top players perform. The 2005 class has some highly hyped players (i.e. Musty, Minnetian, Smith, etc.) but lots of players get hype when they're young.
Pre-U17 hype is largely meaningless. Hockey followers were much more excited by the '00 birth year than the '01 birth year, too.
It really just depends on how the top players perform. The 2005 class has some highly hyped players (i.e. Musty, Minnetian, Smith, etc.) but lots of players get hype when they're young.
Pre-U17 hype is largely meaningless. Hockey followers were much more excited by the '00 birth year than the '01 birth year, too.
Good point about the 00 vs the o1 class. I subrcibe to Neutral Zone and for what it's worth they are not overly enamored with the 05 class. They see it as lacking in high end talent but they are quick to acknowledge that the year of COVID has made scouting more than an inexact science and they firmly subscribe to the belief that development is not linear.
It's funny in talking with CHL and College coaches , I get the indication that for example as forwards go the 05 year is relatively strong. I mean western Canada has already had 10 or so 05's playing in the modified WHL season this year with much success not to mention on the world stage. I think it is really hard to assess much this year as kidshave had a wide range of conditions to deal with :for example Ontario - had no ice , while other markets had allot of ice. I don't think there was much efficient or accurate scouting at all given this situation with Covid and I am not sure Neutral Zone is such an accurate source or other sites like it in the current times.There have just not been adequate scouting resources allocated to form a reasonable picture. In many cases people just looked at the kids when they were much younger. Some of the upcoming OHL draft is based on performance in Bantam hockey. Some kids have grown over half a foot or more. The coming year will be the equalizer as markets open up. I think there will be allot of surprises as the fall 2021 season starts. I think you can at least look to draft results: USHL, OHL, WHL, National Team Selection as a good litmus test as those organizations of any organization dedicated the most resources ( watched tape, talked to coaches, seen games where possible ) to identifying who they need as it directly relates to their success.
Just curious as to why you would think that? The player that comes to mind is Conor Garland.
I wasn't very familiar with his junior career. I was wondering why he chose the Q option and why (despite big scoring numbers in Moncton) he lasted until the fifth round?
Ryan Van Horne
aka Scribe
Not answering for WHB, of course, but his answer doesn't surprise me. As a long-time watcher of the Q, Massachusetts kids are a rarity. I don't know why he gave up his commitment to Penn State, but I suspect the deep-pocketed Moncton owners made him a generous offer.
As for why he fell to the 5th round? He was in his second year of draft eligibility and was blossoming in his third year in the CHL -- as many do. At the time, he was five-foot-eight, not that fast (although his edgework and mobility were very good) and not that strong.
I remember watching him with Moncton and the skill was evident. He had great vision and the hands to deliver the puck to teammates at just the right time and place.
Was I convinced he'd be an NHLer? No, he had a lot of things to work on and he did just that. He's a good example of the value of properly developing a player after the draft.
Beniers, Hughes, Lucius, Samoskevich, Coronato and I’ll say one of the following defenders will slip into the back end of round 1: Peart, Johnson or Morrow.
So 6? I guess Mackie or Coronato could slip or none of those blue liners go in the top 32 so maybe 5 is a better conservative answer but I’ll stick with 6.
So 6? I guess Mackie or Coronato could slip or none of those blue liners go in the top 32 so maybe 5 is a better conservative answer but I’ll stick with 6.
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
5 or 6.
Beniers, Hughes, and Lucius are locks.
It’d be disappointing if another 2-3 weren’t also first rounders. If it’s higher than that, I also wouldn’t be that surprised.
Beniers, Hughes, and Lucius are locks.
It’d be disappointing if another 2-3 weren’t also first rounders. If it’s higher than that, I also wouldn’t be that surprised.
American 1st rounders...I'd say between 8-9 including dual nationals
Locks: Beniers, Hughes, Lucius, Coronato, Sillinger
On Bubble: Samoskevich, Behrens, Duke, Hreshchuk, Pastujov
Long-shot: Broz, Peart, Morrow
Super Long-shot: Boucher, Johnson, Ufko, Blake, Stillman, Spacek
Locks: Beniers, Hughes, Lucius, Coronato, Sillinger
On Bubble: Samoskevich, Behrens, Duke, Hreshchuk, Pastujov
Long-shot: Broz, Peart, Morrow
Super Long-shot: Boucher, Johnson, Ufko, Blake, Stillman, Spacek
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
Going to be a hell of a lot better than last year's draft that is for certain lol.
My gut says 6 or 7..Pastujov is getting overlooked some, kid was the only forward on US doing much of anything at the u18. He has been doing it all year long. I think he goes higher than many are thinking right now.
Morrow is another that looks filthy dynamic...should be a 1st rounder but who knows..Zac Jones went 3rd round and I felt he was a borderline first rounder.
Morrow and Pastujov are my 2 US kids to really focus on as players who go higher than thought.
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Speculation: Offseason coaching thread: Should they stay or should they go?- Latest: CascadiaPenguin
-
-
