Can you summerize Pronman's takes on each of The Blues' top 6 picks, for the posters who don't have a subscription to The Athletic?For what it's worth; Pronman gave us a B+ overall.
NHL Draft grades, analysis for every pick from Corey Pronman
Corey Pronman grades how every team performed at the 2023 NHL Draft.theathletic.com
What is interesting about this article is Armstrong got a surprise call from a G.M. to trade for the 10th overall just after Detroit made their pick. It sounded like they did not have enough time to process the offer & also liked Dvorsky so made the pick.
He even described it as a “crazy” offer, so I’m really curious - alas, we’ll likely never know.
Thanks, Kimzey. I've long respected Pronman's take on drafts. But, I'm a little disappointed that he thinks there are only 2 really good chances to get NHL regulars, and one "maybe". That means that he thinks that they "might" get an NHL regular from one of the Lindstein or Pekarcik pick, and one of them is not likely to make it, and that Burns is only a longshot to ever become an NHL regular. That makes it seem like Burns was a lousy choice in this really deep class of 1st, 2nd and 3rd Round talents, reaching farther down than normal into one-round lower.
But Perron and Steen weren’t those players either when they were Kyrou’s age. We saw Perron and Steen grow a lot as players as they went into their later 20s.
I wouldn't read much into tbh, he has some weird wording/definitions for his tiers. Tbh he didn't give many teams the 3 or more prospects with good chances to be NHL regulars, maybe like 1 or 2 teams. Also he only has 38 prospects who project as better than 3rd pairing D/bottom 6 player. Every prospect evaluator has their own biases and types of players they like. For example Pronman thinks Simashev has two way top pair potential while Wheeler thinks he's more of a No.3-5 potential. Only time will tell
I think it’s a fine assessment. You have to have a very good draft to have 3+ players make the NHL.
That's one of my greatest hopes, when it comes to The Blues' future. Otherwise he is, basically a one-dimensional player, and a lot less value to his team than someone of his skills and athletic ability can be. At least Thomas gives it a try, even though he's not as effective as he can be, and WILL be after he gets stronger. I hope he is still working on building up his strength. And, I'd like Kyrou to do that, as well.
Yes, but this year's super deep draft has the top half of The 3rd filled with players of the level that normally fall in the 2nd. And Lindstein has too much in the way of skills and hockey sense to fail to even become a regular 3rd pairing D-man. I'll be very surprised if Burns can't do the same, at least making it to #6 on one of the weakest teams in The NHL. I feel the same about Pekarcik. I wouldn't bet that he's a lock to become an NHL star, 1st liner, or even top 6er, or even top 9er on a good team. But, I'll be surprised if he's NEVER a Top 9er on even a weak NHL team, without having a career destroying injury. I know that it is difficult to make The NHL as a regular. I've been following The League since 1949-50, and had neighbourhood friends make that league when it had only 6 teams. Yes, I've seen several highly touted high 1st Round choices fail to even play one game in The NHL. But, still, I think Pronman is just being a little too conservative.
Hmm, maybe it's a semantic argument we're having here. I don't think I would disagree that Thomas lacks "competitiveness" along the boards, but he definitely isn't heavy. I think he can be much heavier on those types of plays and obviously I think you'd see a more well rounded player. Maybe you're taking issue with my wording as opposed to if we had a more nuanced discussion about what I think competitive means?
I don’t disagree, but he did add a demonstrable amount of strength after getting pushed around by the Avs. I think it served him well, but…
I wasn't disagreeing with you, but was criticizing the article. I'm not a big fan of the pick. I trust our scouting staff, but it felt like a reach. But I fully disagree with anyone spinning a narrative that it was a clear 25-35 spot reach.
That reminds me a little of Toropchenko. But, from what I've seen of him, I think he skates with a little better puck control (thank goodness). He's got time to work on that before he comes even to The AHL.
Brindley is a local celebrity down here now; not many guys get drafted into the NHL out of Southwest Florida. He’s been all over the news these past couple days!
I remember him as the guy who injured Wayne Babych and effectively ended his career. In a exhibition game, a meaningless fight in a meaningless game. It wasn't punches that caused the injury but the fall to the ice. Babych landed on his shoulder.
Then again, black book and McKeens were night and day on Stancl. Realizing the in between on Lindstein and Burns both, I see two 4-6 guys if the stars line up. Lindstein is playing men’s league hockey just like Reinbacher. I realize the stats aren’t an offensive juggernaut, but against his peers he was right there with Willander and Pelikka shutting folks down.
What no-trade clause holder would waive it to allow himself to be traded to The abysmal Flyers??? Did Krug turn down any trades to a potential playoff-contending team? I don't recall any buzz about Army discussing a trade with any other teams. I think there still may be a chance to dump him off, that he'll accept. Maybe The Kracken? They're on the rise, and Krug might accept a trade to them, where he can be the #1 or #2 team PP QB, on a playoff-bound team that actually wants him.
Another Parayko!
1988? Well that was during Czechoslovakia times and that country was a communist so of course nobody spoke english. Nowadays, young people in Slovakia can speak english easily. At least most of them.
