Prospect Info: Blues Prospect Rankings #3

[PocketNines]

Rattie. His clutch aspect on top of his skill is what does it for me. Also his consistency.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Rattie. His clutch aspect on top of his skill is what does it for me. Also his consistency.

I'm starting to realize that we're likely to see Rattie and Jaskin fighting for the first injury call-up.

 

[allen wrench]

I see Rattie, Jaskin and Allen essentially tied. Rattie probably has the highest potential but he's undersized, needs to work on his defensive game and could improve his physicality too. Jaskin is probably the safest bet but I wonder just how well his offense will translate to the NHL. Allen is probably the most valuable player of the 3 if he reaches his top-end potential but goalies are near impossible to project. For me, I went with Rattie here but I could see these 3 in any order.

Agreed. The more I think about it, the tougher it gets. However, if I had to rate which one is currently the Blues' third ranked "prospect", then it would be Allen. Based on his performance during his stint in the NHL he showed me a lot of promise. At the time the Blues' goalie situation was collapsing like Mickelson at the US open. Allen ironed out the crease and settled the goaltending tribulations. The team seemed to find confidence in Allen's game. If Allen faltered, then I believe the Blues' season would have ended differently.

All three will be productive players, imo. I've just seen Allen compete at the NHL level, and that is the difference for me. It might not be fair, but in the immortal words of Tupac, "that's just the way it is."

 

[STL fan in MN]

This is nearly opposite what I've seen. Rattie isn't big and bulky, but he's 6' to 6'1" (he's the same height as Morgan Rielly and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins who are both listed at 6'1") and his skating has improved to the point that his speed is a plus. He is faster than Jaskin is. Jaskin isn't dreadfully slow, but his skating is his worst asset. He is not fast. And I don't think Jaskin's skills with the puck are in question at all. Whether or not he becomes a top-6 kind of guy is certainly yet to be seen, but his skills are already NHL-level.

When the prospects came to town a week or two ago, the Blues said Rattie measured in at 5'11" and something like 176 lbs. Rattie isn't 6' or 6'1". That said, I think the concerns about his size are overblown. He still needs to add some more muscle and strength but I think he should eventually be fine. I think his current size will make it pretty hard for him to make the team out of camp though (that, and there's not really any room for him anyway) but I think he should probably be ready for the NHL size-wise in the next year or so. He's been steadily bulking up since being drafted.

 

[Stealth JD]

J-Allen.

Until Rattie proves ANYTHING at the AHL, I don't see how he can be #3

 

[tfriede2]

J-Allen.

Until Rattie proves ANYTHING at the AHL, I don't see how he can be #3

Does your line of thinking preclude you from selecting any prospect who is not yet eligible to play in the AHL before a prospect who has proven himself in the AHL, or is this specific to Rattie/Allen? For instance, if we had drafted MacKinnon, would he be below Allen because he hasn't played in the AHL yet? I'm not being sarcastic, this is a serious question. Just wondering if proving one's self in the AHL is a requirement (for you) for selecting a player before one who has already proven himself. Just an interesting perspective, if that's your logic.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Does your line of thinking preclude you from selecting any prospect who is not yet eligible to play in the AHL before a prospect who has proven himself in the AHL, or is this specific to Rattie/Allen? For instance, if we had drafted MacKinnon, would he be below Allen because he hasn't played in the AHL yet? I'm not being sarcastic, this is a serious question. Just wondering if proving one's self in the AHL is a requirement (for you) for selecting a player before one who has already proven himself. Just an interesting perspective, if that's your logic.

No, I feel that way, too. Rattie is hyped a lot because of his stats as a junior. I'm skeptical until I see him accomplish something against men in a pro league. I hope he makes the transition effectively, but he's making a pretty big jump to the AHL this year. Allen deserves some credit for what he has already accomplished (in conjunction with his ceiling).

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

No, I feel that way, too. Rattie is hyped a lot because of his stats as a junior. I'm skeptical until I see him accomplish something against men in a pro league. I hope he makes the transition effectively, but he's making a pretty big jump to the AHL this year. Allen deserves some credit for what he has already accomplished (in conjunction with his ceiling).

right on

 

[bluesfan94]

No, I feel that way, too. Rattie is hyped a lot because of his stats as a junior. I'm skeptical until I see him accomplish something against men in a pro league. I hope he makes the transition effectively, but he's making a pretty big jump to the AHL this year. Allen deserves some credit for what he has already accomplished (in conjunction with his ceiling).

The problem with this is that now TJ Hensick/Brett Sterling/Keith Aucoin/etc look fantastic when they aren't. If Rattie doesn't succeed to the level we hope in the AHL because he isn't surrounded by players capable of playing to his level of hockey IQ, should we dock him for that? Because we definitely didn't when Schwartz played in the A this past year.

 

[Stealth JD]

No, I feel that way, too. Rattie is hyped a lot because of his stats as a junior. I'm skeptical until I see him accomplish something against men in a pro league. I hope he makes the transition effectively, but he's making a pretty big jump to the AHL this year. Allen deserves some credit for what he has already accomplished (in conjunction with his ceiling).

^answered for me.

I don't buy the hype with Rattie until I see his game translate to the next level. There are some guys (like Pietrangelo and Oshie) who you see as junior-leaguers/college players and you know their games will translate. Maybe Rattie's will, maybe it won't...but we know Allen's game does.

The problem with this is that now TJ Hensick/Brett Sterling/Keith Aucoin/etc look fantastic when they aren't. If Rattie doesn't succeed to the level we hope in the AHL because he isn't surrounded by players capable of playing to his level of hockey IQ, should we dock him for that? Because we definitely didn't when Schwartz played in the A this past year.

Also true. Just because Rattie succeeds in the AHL, it doesn't mean he'll have anything to show for it in the NHL. Aaron Palushaj was terrific in Hamilton, but can't secure an NHL job. Rattie has a lot to prove, and I'm not as high on him as most are.

 

[BlueBeard]

The problem with this is that now TJ Hensick/Brett Sterling/Keith Aucoin/etc look fantastic when they aren't. If Rattie doesn't succeed to the level we hope in the AHL because he isn't surrounded by players capable of playing to his level of hockey IQ, should we dock him for that? Because we definitely didn't when Schwartz played in the A this past year.

You can tell an NHL quality player in the AHL pretty easily. Hensick was one of the better point producers in the AHL while he was there but he never tilted the ice towards the other team's zone as someone like Schwartz did. If Rattie is NHL material he will stick out regardless of what his numbers are.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

The problem with this is that now TJ Hensick/Brett Sterling/Keith Aucoin/etc look fantastic when they aren't. If Rattie doesn't succeed to the level we hope in the AHL because he isn't surrounded by players capable of playing to his level of hockey IQ, should we dock him for that? Because we definitely didn't when Schwartz played in the A this past year.

Even if he has mediocre line-mates (he won't, he'll be with Aucoin and Jaskin most likely) we'll be able to see whether defending teams are able to physically overpower Rattie and shut him down. I want him to demonstrate that he can still make plays with the puck and (probably more importantly if he wants to play on Hitchcock's Blues) play competent defense against guys bigger than him.

He doesn't have to lead the league in goals. I am talking about how he handles the physicality of a men's league.

 

[rumrokh]

When the prospects came to town a week or two ago, the Blues said Rattie measured in at 5'11" and something like 176 lbs. Rattie isn't 6' or 6'1". That said, I think the concerns about his size are overblown. He still needs to add some more muscle and strength but I think he should eventually be fine. I think his current size will make it pretty hard for him to make the team out of camp though (that, and there's not really any room for him anyway) but I think he should probably be ready for the NHL size-wise in the next year or so. He's been steadily bulking up since being drafted.

If Rattie is only 5'11", then nearly everybody has a couple inches added to their bios. I know that happens, just making it clear, though. If you looked at him next to Seth Jones when they celebrated a goal for the Winterhawks, Jones was not a full five damn inches taller. Three, maybe. And, again, there are plenty of other photos in which he's the same height as guys who are 1. listed as taller, and 2. are not big, but are not overly small at the NHL level, either.

Rattie will never be a physical force, but I don't think he'll get shoved around much, either, for most of his career. Maybe a bit at first as he adjusts, but that happens to almost everybody. Oshie was quickly known for his reverse hits, but he turned 22 soon after his first season started. Rattie just turned 20. And Oshie played way fewer games and, like most college players, got a ton of time in the gym.

Schwartz is a guy who has a weird reputation of getting pushed around, but I don't really see it more often than with any other player who isn't huge. And for every time he does get nudged off the puck because of his size, he wins a puck battle or two because he slipped under a check that a larger player couldn't have. Plenty of smaller guys get name-dropped, but size is usually only a real issue for players who are not good enough in the first place. Hensick, for example, just isn't that smart of a player. He has no awareness for how to get separation or get open. We'll ultimately see if that's Rattie, too, but I don't think it will be.

 

[Oberyn]

Rattie's size isn't a huge deal because of his shiftiness. He eludes checkers, his game isn't built around muscling off defenders. Watch a guy like Eberle cause that's the type of player Rattie is going to be.

 

[EastonBlues22]

I'm calling it for Rattie.

Poll #4 is up.