Are the Oilers prospects over-rated??

[hfboardsuser]

Or the fans from Calgary (I know this will hit home because of the rivalry thing) can point to a survey done by The Hockey News where the NHL scouts selected the best prospects in each league and managed to get three players named (Phaneuf, Nystrom and Chucko IIRC) and the Oilers didn't get a single one.

I don't really care if we don't have a bluechip prospect.

Calgary's depth in the top 20:

1st Line Forwards: 0
2nd Line Forwards: 2
3rd Line Forwards: 8
4th Line Forwards: 5

Top 4 Defensemen: 2
Bottom 2 Defensemen: 0

Starting Goaltenders: 1
Backup Goaltenders: 2

One bluechip defenseman does not a talented prospect group make.

 

[se7en*]

I could care less what Flames fans think about our prospects, they don't merit my attention. And don't lower yourself to a trolls level and insult my intelligence with quips like "Since you're an Oiler fan I'll try and put it into perspective for you", please. I don't appreciate that, and let's be realistic, your "perspective" is skewed at best.

I know that the writers has seen our players in action, that's why they are the writers. Thus they have the authority to judge and that makes their opinion credible. Bottom line is I trust their rankings over anything you have to add.

I don't read THN, and I won't discredit their opinion that they have Phaneuf, Nystorm & Chucko over any of our group. And I still know the Oilers talent pools best theirs without question.

 

[FLAMESFAN]

"bitter jealousy" that we actually can get past the first round?

 

[hfboardsuser]

"bitter jealousy" that we actually can get past the first round?

Yeah, the same jealousy I had at seeing Carolina and Anaheim win a few playoff series

 

[se7en*]

"bitter jealousy" that we actually can get past the first round?

Pettiness from a Flames fan.

Hardly surprising, or worth noting.

 

[s7ark]

"bitter jealousy" that we actually can get past the first round?

Yeah those 7 years before almost are made up for by that, huh

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I could care less what Flames fans think about our prospects, they don't merit my attention.

I'm not a Flames fan by the way. I used that team as an example because I knew they would bring out exactly what you were trying to accuse me of, bitter jealousy. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[FLAMESFAN]

Yeah those 7 years before almost are made up for by that, huh

So because you have won 1 little playoff round in those 7 years, I am suppossed to be impressed? :lol
We did in one spring, what your team has forgotten how to do. I guess now you'll start talking about the "glory days......"

 

[se7en*]

I'm not a Flames fan by the way. I used that team as an example because I knew they would bring out exactly what you were trying to accuse me of, bitter jealousy. Thank you for proving my point.

You are raving.

I never said or even insinuated you were a Flames fan, and when I think of them they evoke a smug indifference, far from jealousy.

Could you please stop the cheapshots and stick to the discussion of why the Oilers talent pool sucks, why your opinion should be taken as gospel, and why the writers (including non-Oilers fans) don't know what they're doing?

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Why would it be "bitter jealousy"? Each team has its own prospects that the fans think are really good. Frankly, the only time that any jealousy should crop up is when a respectable non-biased journal releases rankings. Then there is a source of jealousy. But when a fan site hoists up some ficticious rankings of players that the writers have never seen, well that just doesn't qualify as a reason for jealousy. Since you're an Oiler fan I'll try and put it into perspective for you. You can point to Hockey's Future and say that the fan site has the Oilers prospects ranked as number four, yet have nothing from the teams or scouting bureaus to back it up. Or the fans from Calgary (I know this will hit home because of the rivalry thing) can point to a survey done by The Hockey News where the NHL scouts selected the best prospects in each league and managed to get three players named (Phaneuf, Nystrom and Chucko IIRC) and the Oilers didn't get a single one. Where is the potential for jealousy? The fan site where a small cross section of fans make the call, or a respected international publication who publishes the selections of real NHL scouts?

I like hope and prospects are just that, hope. I think something you said does ring true.

We traded away so many star players we better have a great talent pool.

After giving away so much you hope to get something back of value. I think that plays on the fans mind and affects the voting more than the level of play the player is attaining or the growth he is showing. I guess its human nature.

Okay, I've said my piece. Oiler fan dog pile can now commence.

I am an Oilers fan who happens to agree (for the most part) with your comments. HF is a great site with wonderful fan discussion and opinion. But I would hardly look upon it as an authority for prospect evaluation and ranking. Great read and fun for discussion but it is what it is.

I've lived through 20+ years of Oiler drafts which have jaded me somewhat about the hyping of the 'next one.' If three or four of these Oiler prospects make the show, then I will be happy. If one can crack top two lines or defense pairings, I will be estatic. Rightly or wrongly, I think the 2003 draft decision to bypass Parise for Pouliot/Jacques will define the legacy of this Oiler scouting staff. However as an Oiler fan, the jury is still out.

The Calgary comparison is a valuable one for Oiler fans. Like it or not, we have watched Sutter assemble a competitive team using a different approach from the Oilers. Instead of hording picks, Sutter has turned question marks (draft picks) into youngish NHL talent including Kipper, Nilsson, Nieminen, Simon, and Lankow. He's also building a pretty solid prospect base.

I recently attended a Roadrunner/Mighty Duck game and left with a strong reminder how few prospects ever make the show. Among my party, we identified about six prospective NHLers between the two teams. The stone cold reality is so few ever make the big jump to the show and even fewer make a meaningful contribution.

I want to believe most Oiler prospects will beat the odds. Unfortunately, a healthy dose of Jason Bonsignore, Steve Kelly, Michael Heinrich among others have left me with a healthy skepticism.

 

[se7en*]

So because you have won 1 little playoff round in those 7 years, I am suppossed to be impressed? :lol
We did in one spring, what your team has forgotten how to do. I guess now you'll start talking about the "glory days......"

Quack, quack, quack.

 

[hfboardsuser]

So because you have won 1 little playoff round in those 7 years, I am suppossed to be impressed?
We did in one spring, what your team has forgotten how to do. I guess now you'll start talking about the "glory days......"

I don't know about you, but I'd rather hang on to the glory days of my team instead of a fluke performance.

 

[oilers_guy_eddie]

Or the fans from Calgary (I know this will hit home because of the rivalry thing) can point to a survey done by The Hockey News where the NHL scouts selected the best prospects in each league and managed to get three players named (Phaneuf, Nystrom and Chucko IIRC) and the Oilers didn't get a single one. Where is the potential for jealousy?

uh, if Eric Nystrom is one of the prospects we're supposed to be jealous of, I guess I must be missing something. If this Top Ten list you're going on about has Eric Nystrom as one of the Top 10 players, can it really be that good?

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

uh, if Eric Nystrom is one of the prospects we're supposed to be jealous of, I guess I must be missing something. If this Top Ten list you're going on about has Eric Nystrom as one of the Top 10 players, can it really be that good?

You know something, I have never been an Eric Nystrom fan myself, but he just keeps hanging around these polls and continually popping up on radar with the scouts. That tells me something about the guy. Even when the hype has long ago faded he still draws attention from those in the hockey business and garners accolades. Maybe there is something to be said about that? The prospect game is all about improvement and growth. Obviously Nystrom is doing something that the scouts like and continues to show growth toward an NHL career. I think the type of game he plays also sells well with the scouts and makes him stand out. He plays a pro game and that puts him a head of many other "more talented" prospects who are great junior scorers but don't play a strong two way game. From this I have earned a level of respect for the player.

 

[oilers_guy_eddie]

Sure, he sounds like a guy who'll have a sure-fire pro career... as an energy-line player. But I thought you cited this survey as evidence of the Oilers' lack of *elite* prospects. Is Eric Nystrom an *elite* prospect? (Shouldn't an elite forward at least be in the top 10 on his own team in scoring?)

 

[McThome]

it's pretty funny that Oilers fans being proud of having the greatest dynasty ever is something that the Flames fans try and look down on.

the rankings are possible results. it's a case by case thing. A quarter, maybe, of all prospects with a ranking of 5 or higher will make the NHL. I think everybody knows that.

 

[Canadian Time]

Considering that 5 is the break for NHL talent, and the majority of players who get a sniff of the NHL never surpass the third line which is a 6, you can quickly see where the ratings are overblown. The Oilers have 20 players rated at 6.5 (above third line) potential. They have 47 prospects listed as having NHL calibre talent. You think that is realistic?

This is a really good question actually. It's not even remotely realistic. The odds of even making the NHL suggest that perhaps 10 or 15% of this number would make a team very happy. How is it that a fanbase and supposed expert writer thinks they could have "20" second liners in their prospect pool?

My question is always why? The only thing I keep coming back to is the local media in Edmonton. Lowe for the last two years has told the city that the team is good enough to secure home ice advantage and that the kids in the system are a wonderful lot. The media laps it up and repeats it over and over. Soon the fans do too.

What else could it be? It seems a shame to suggest that the fanbase are being led by the nose, but what's the alternative? Any other alternative is even less kind.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Sure, he sounds like a guy who'll have a sure-fire pro career... as an energy-line player. But I thought you cited this survey as evidence of the Oilers' lack of *elite* prospects. Is Eric Nystrom an *elite* prospect? (Shouldn't an elite forward at least be in the top 10 on his own team in scoring?)

I guess there is the flaw in your evaluation. You think that rating a prospect is all about scoring numbers. The road to the NHL is littered with big time scorers who could not play a two way game. Growth isn't always about posting big numbers and is usually honing the finer points of the game and assuming a role the coach asks of you. Maybe the coach recognizes that his team has a certain make up and assigns a player a given role because he is more capable of playing that role? Its no insult to a player when the coach asks him to focus on something for the good of the team, especially when the coach selects him the team captain. For Eric Nystrom it appears that this may have been the case. Red Berenson obviously saw something in the kid and decided that he was the most versatile player on the team and gave him a role to perform in the mold of Guy Carbonneau. For a coach like Berenson to do what he has with Nystrom shows a lot of trust and belief in the kid. That is something that I have recognized and made me pay a little more attention to him. I'm still not a fan of him, but I can see how he has the skill, temperment and attitude to be great NHL player. It appears he's being groomed to be a Doug Jarvis. Who wouldn't want a player like that on their team?

it's pretty funny that Oilers fans being proud of having the greatest dynasty ever is something that the Flames fans try and look down on.

The greatest dynasty ever? I don't mean to burst your bubble but the Oilers team was not the greatest dynasty ever. They had a fantastic run, and likely are in the top five, but I would not consider them the greatest dynasty. They won five Stanley Cups, but they did not win them in succession. The teams that won their cups in succession get the nod as being the greatest dynasties. The 56-60 Canadiens, the 76-79 Canadiens, the 80-83 Islanders are all greater dynasties than the Oilers were.

I don't think anyone, even a Flames fan, looks down on the Oilers accomplishments in the 80's. I think that some may get tired of the notion of the fans grasping on to something and refusing to let it go. We would be coming up on the 15th anniversary of the Oilers' last Stanley Cup championship this spring, so maybe its time to let that run be nothing but a memory and focus on the now? I'm pretty sure that Buffalo Bills fans don't continually bring up the fact that won consecutive AFL Championships when discussing the plight of their team during the 2004 season.

the rankings are possible results. it's a case by case thing. A quarter, maybe, of all prospects with a ranking of 5 or higher will make the NHL. I think everybody knows that.

No, the rankings are an impossibility. No organization has 47 players that they believe have NHL talent. None. If they did the NHL would expand again and have a team in every major city on the continent. You saying that a team has a 25% success rate of developing players? And everyone knows this? You better call all the NHL teams and tell them that they are not meeting the success level that everyone knows they should be attaining.

Fact of the matter is that at any given time a team knows they have three or four guys that they are pretty hopeful for making it to the NHL and having long term careers. They have another three or four that see as projects and could develop into an NHL calibre player. The rest are all long shots where you hope a guy will be a late bloomer or over achieve, finding a way to the league for a cup of coffee. Maybe, one of these guys catches lightning in a bottle and finds a niche, allowing him to have an NHL career. It doesn't happen very often, but it does take place.

There is the tough part of the prospect game. Every year someone new comes along and becomes the flavor of the month. Three short years ago Oiler fans were all abuzz about Michel Riesen, Michael Henrich and Jani Rita. Those were the stars of tomorrow. Where are they now? Riesen is in the Swiss league watching NHL stars Thornton and Nash. Rita is on the fringe of prospect-dom and is going to get his last shot at making the NHL when play resumes. Henrich is out of hockey all together. What is funny is that out of the 29 young men selected in the three drafts that these three "stars of tomorrow" came from, the best player was a long shot third rounder that beat the odds. Mike Comrie has proven to be the best player the Oilers selected in this period and he had to over come great odds to get to the NHL. Beyond him the only players from the bunch to become NHL players have been Jason Chimera, Shawn Horcoff and Alex Semenov (a 13% success rate). I think that the projections are extremely generous and are not realistic. If you feel otherwise that is your perogative, but I think you are setting yourself up for endless heartbreak and frustration by continuing to have this pie-in-sky outlook on things. It isn't reality and it likely isn't healthy.

 

[oilers_guy_eddie]

I guess there is the flaw in your evaluation. You think that rating a prospect is all about scoring numbers. The road to the NHL is littered with big time scorers who could not play a two way game. Growth isn't always about posting big numbers and is usually honing the finer points of the game and assuming a role the coach asks of you. Maybe the coach recognizes that his team has a certain make up and assigns a player a given role because he is more capable of playing that role? Its no insult to a player when the coach asks him to focus on something for the good of the team, especially when the coach selects him the team captain. For Eric Nystrom it appears that this may have been the case. Red Berenson obviously saw something in the kid and decided that he was the most versatile player on the team and gave him a role to perform in the mold of Guy Carbonneau. For a coach like Berenson to do what he has with Nystrom shows a lot of trust and belief in the kid. That is something that I have recognized and made me pay a little more attention to him. I'm still not a fan of him, but I can see how he has the skill, temperment and attitude to be great NHL player. It appears he's being groomed to be a Doug Jarvis. Who wouldn't want a player like that on their team?

How many players who have shown so little offense in college have gone on to show any in the NHL? I'm not asking for a rationalization or an excuse, I'm just asking for examples.

I think it's great that he has a fantastic work ethic and great leadership skills; I don't think those qualities alone qualify a player as an elite prospect. (didn't people rave about Daniel Tkachuk's work-ethic and leadership skills when he was in Junior?)

Most NHL teams have some players with great work ethic and great commitment to defence and minimal offensive talent. Successful teams need players like that. But they're not hard to find. Certainly not something you'd spend a top 10 draft pick on, and not something so unique and rare that it merits being on a top 10 list. Perhaps the hype around Nystrom has always had a lot to do with his name, and now it's his name and his ridiculously high draft position.

You came in asking why we should trust HF's rankings over this great top 10 list from THN you have; I'm asking, if it rates Eric Nystrom that highly how great is it? Do you have a link I could read or something?

You asked how we'd respond to a Flames fan who's chuffed about their depth because they have 3 guys on your super list? I'd tell him that if Eric Nystrom is the 2nd best forward in the system, the depth can't be all that great.

There is the tough part of the prospect game. Every year someone new comes along and becomes the flavor of the month. Three short years ago Oiler fans were all abuzz about Michel Riesen, Michael Henrich and Jani Rita. Those were the stars of tomorrow. Where are they now? Riesen is in the Swiss league watching NHL stars Thornton and Nash. Rita is on the fringe of prospect-dom and is going to get his last shot at making the NHL when play resumes. Henrich is out of hockey all together. What is funny is that out of the 29 young men selected in the three drafts that these three "stars of tomorrow" came from, the best player was a long shot third rounder that beat the odds. Mike Comrie has proven to be the best player the Oilers selected in this period and he had to over come great odds to get to the NHL. Beyond him the only players from the bunch to become NHL players have been Jason Chimera, Shawn Horcoff and Alex Semenov (a 13% success rate). I think that the projections are extremely generous and are not realistic. If you feel otherwise that is your perogative, but I think you are setting yourself up for endless heartbreak and frustration by continuing to have this pie-in-sky outlook on things. It isn't reality and it likely isn't healthy.

Do you think Oiler fans are unique in this regard? You mentioned the Oilers having an absurd 20 guys rated 6.5 and higher; I notice that the Rangers have 19.

I'd also point out that the letter grade that goes with the number is there to acknowledge the phenomenon you mention. The number rates the potential the player is believed to have; the letter grade rates his chances of getting there. Pavel Brendl could have been a 9F, a guy with spectacular potential but serious issues that gave him little chance of ever getting there. Some might say the same about Schremp, I won't object.


What you're saying about peoples' overoptimistic belief in prospects' potential is completely true. What I take issue with is the notion that it's somehow unique to Oiler fans. Replace Riesen and Henrich with a couple of other names, and you could be talking about just about any team in the league.

 

[Slats432]

No, the rankings are an impossibility. No organization has 47 players that they believe have NHL talent. None. If they did the NHL would expand again and have a team in every major city on the continent. You saying that a team has a 25% success rate of developing players? And everyone knows this? You better call all the NHL teams and tell them that they are not meeting the success level that everyone knows they should be attaining.

No. Wrong answer. Rating 20 players at 6.5 or over means that there are 20 players within the organization within one small window in time have a top end potential to reach a certain spot in the future. If HF had unlimited resources the complexity of the top 20 would be done far more often, and the calculations would be so confusing that the average fan wouldn't understand them.

When looking at a prospects page you can't look at the ratings as a group. You have to look at each player individually. For example, let's use Alexei Kaigorodov. You might have seen him two years ago as a 7.0C. With his progression, he might now be a 7.5B. You can only use the knowledge you have to rate prospects.

It isn't an exact science either. If Robbie Schremp decides to slack and not work on his skating and defensive game, he will be a never was. So how do you rate his top potential? Well, he is a top line player with holes in his game. The rating is accurate as it is for most players on HF.

Although as a fan of the rival team, it makes for good posts to discount the ratings.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

The greatest dynasty ever? I don't mean to burst your bubble but the Oilers team was not the greatest dynasty ever. They had a fantastic run, and likely are in the top five, but I would not consider them the greatest dynasty. They won five Stanley Cups, but they did not win them in succession. The teams that won their cups in succession get the nod as being the greatest dynasties. The 56-60 Canadiens, the 76-79 Canadiens, the 80-83 Islanders are all greater dynasties than the Oilers were.

I don't think anyone, even a Flames fan, looks down on the Oilers accomplishments in the 80's. I think that some may get tired of the notion of the fans grasping on to something and refusing to let it go. We would be coming up on the 15th anniversary of the Oilers' last Stanley Cup championship this spring, so maybe its time to let that run be nothing but a memory and focus on the now? I'm pretty sure that Buffalo Bills fans don't continually bring up the fact that won consecutive AFL Championships when discussing the plight of their team during the 2004 season.

I don't want to live in the past but I don't really get your comparison to the Buffalo Bills... and you seriously undervalue the Oiler dynasty. They are likely number 1 or 2 in terms of greatest teams in NHL history. Only the 76-79 Canadiens can compare to the Oilers great teams of the 1980's and the 93-94 New York Oilers.

The Oilers won their first cup within five years of entering the NHL. They achieved this while essentially being neutered upon joining - agreeing to give up the majority of its players and being relegated to the last drafting position (#21) in the deepest draft in NHL history. Despite this 'rookie initiation', the Oilers built the definitive team anchored by Hall of Famers Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Coffey, Fuhr, and a solid supporting cast of Anderson, Lowe, Tikkanen, and others. So much firepower, the league changed rules to offset their dominance. No more four on four for offsetting penalties. Must be five on five.

By contrast, the 56-60 Canadiens excelled in a six team loop where they reaped the benefit of territorial rights annually to the best player in Quebec. Great team? Absolutely. But no match for Edmonton's firepower and Fuhr goaltending.

The New York Islanders had a great team. They required eight years to reach the top and benefitted from high draft picks to build their team. But I doubt they would beat the Oilers teams. Gretzky, Messier > Trottier, Bossy; Potvin > Coffey (maybe) but Fuhr > Smith. Close saw off on the role players. But look at the longevity of the Oiler star players and their ability to will a Stanley Cup win for long starving Ranger fans.

Now Oilers versus the 76-79 Canadiens, that is the ultimate Stanley Cup Final that I would love to see.

 

[kruezer]

I don't want to live in the past but I don't really get your comparison to the Buffalo Bills... and you seriously undervalue the Oiler dynasty. They are likely number 1 or 2 in terms of greatest teams in NHL history. Only the 76-79 Canadiens can compare to the Oilers great teams of the 1980's and the 93-94 New York Oilers.

The Oilers won their first cup within five years of entering the NHL. They achieved this while essentially being neutered upon joining - agreeing to give up the majority of its players and being relegated to the last drafting position (#21) in the deepest draft in NHL history. Despite this 'rookie initiation', the Oilers built the definitive team anchored by Hall of Famers Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Coffey, Fuhr, and a solid supporting cast of Anderson, Lowe, Tikkanen, and others. So much firepower, the league changed rules to offset their dominance. No more four on four for offsetting penalties. Must be five on five.

By contrast, the 56-60 Canadiens excelled in a six team loop where they reaped the benefit of territorial rights annually to the best player in Quebec. Great team? Absolutely. But no match for Edmonton's firepower and Fuhr goaltending.

The New York Islanders had a great team. They required eight years to reach the top and benefitted from high draft picks to build their team. But I doubt they would beat the Oilers teams. Gretzky, Messier > Trottier, Bossy; Potvin > Coffey (maybe) but Fuhr > Smith. Close saw off on the role players. But look at the longevity of the Oiler star players and their ability to will a Stanley Cup win for long starving Ranger fans.

Now Oilers versus the 76-79 Canadiens, that is the ultimate Stanley Cup Final that I would love to see.

While I can agree with your take on the best teams every BEL, I don't see how ease of creation is really that relevant? Shouldn't the greatness of the team be all that matters?

From Captain Obvious, most prospects are overrated.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

While I can agree with your take on the best teams every BEL, I don't see how ease of creation is really that relevant? Shouldn't the greatness of the team be all that matters?

From Captain Obvious, most prospects are overrated.

Guilty of being a bit malodramatic! The road to greatness was different for these teams. Perhaps I've overstated but the entry requirements for Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec, and New England were quite strict and perceived by many as punishment for the inflationary effect the WHA had on the NHL monopoly. Reality is these teams were gutted as a condition to gain access to the NHL. Assigned drafting positioning at the end of round one worked out for Edmonton with Kevin Lowe but could have been worse (see Winnipeg - Jimmy Mann).

By contrast, the NY Islanders for example, chose first overall in their first year. Drafting in a sixteen team league, in year two this included access to and selection of franchise player Denis Potvin. Clark Gillies and Trottier who incredibly slipped to the second round followed thereafter and the die was cast for their powerhouse.

 

[Cloned]

This is a really good question actually. It's not even remotely realistic. The odds of even making the NHL suggest that perhaps 10 or 15% of this number would make a team very happy. How is it that a fanbase and supposed expert writer thinks they could have "20" second liners in their prospect pool?

I think you may have answered your own question in the wording of it. "Could" is not the same as "will." I think slats432 hit it on the head. Each and every one of those 20 prospects could individually, at the time the rankings were done, make the NHL in a projected role. Looking at it collectively and as a certainty is the wrong way to look at it, IMO. Do you say "Well, I can't rate Player X a 6.5 because Team A already has 19 players rated at 6.5?" You don't base one prospect's ranking on any of the others, in other words. Similarly, when you think about each prospect as a possibility rather than as a certainty, the prospect rankings aren't nearly as biased as it first appears.

As for the "supposed expert writer," Guy Flaming does his research. This isn't some guy sitting at home looking at another prospect website and then paraphrasing other articles into his own work. Sure, I disagree with some of his rankings here and there, but the writer isn't the problem here.

All IMO.

 

[Guy Flaming]

The Hockey News is not respected, but Hockey's Future is? Why, because THN does not recognize Oiler prospects and HF does? THN has been the standard for hockey journalism. They have professionals in each market and well respected contributing experts providing content. They have direct connections to the individual teams and the scouting bureaus. While I do not agree with a lot of what THN has to say I do respect the periodical as it is professional through and through. Hockey's Future is a fine web site and a joy for the fan community, but the content and articles are extremely suspect and written by obvious fans.

Hi There.

I love the Hockey News. Even got a subscription for Christmas. Rob T., (you know him, the Edmonton writer who supplies the Oiler updates for THN) he's a great guy too and I'll let him know you like his stuff. He sits a little ways down in the pressbox from me at Rexall Place.

I write for Hockey's Future and you'll never believe this but...(gasp!) I have access to the Oilers too!! I could ramble on about how Kevin Lowe knows me by first name or that I talk to Oiler scouts on a regular basis, or I could even show you my press pass but somehow I don't think that would settle this for you would it?

Oh and by the way, I also write for ISS, you know... International Scouting Service? They're one of those "scouting bureaus" you mentioned. Now, I'm not a scout of course, but I do talk to those who are.

Any other way you want to try and discredit my opinion?

If you want to offer a differing opinion on a player's rating, great! But to insult me and the other writers here at HF was disrespectful and to call us a simple fan site run and written by casual fans was equally wrong. Many of the writers here are journalists already (hell, Simon Richard, the guy providing HF's excellent WJC coverage, has a book to his credit already!) while many others are getting their feet wet during or after completing studies in the field. For many it might be their first writing gig, or a way for them to hone their craft and I'll take offence to you suggesting my work is unworthy because it's not in Sports Illustrated or something.

Oh and one more thing... The Hockey News? Check page 31 of the October 26, 2004 issue. Yeah, that is me.

Hmmm... now what do you know about that?