Prospect Info: Blues Prospect Rankings #6

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

Vannelli is a great skater and was ranked by some to be a late first in a supposedly deep draft, while Schmaltz was seen as a bit of an off-the-board pick.

I basically agree that it's hard to choose at this point with players like that, but it's not crazy to have a preference.

Saying a pick is "off the board" has never quite made much sense to me. Why do we as fans think we know more about the draftees than the actual NHL teams? I mean really, obviously the blues saw/see something in Schmaltz that make him good enough to be a 1st rounder. They obviously liked him more than Gaunce at center and obviously think he'll be a good player in the NHL, so why is it an off the board pick? Because the hockey news didn't have him ranked in the top 35? I think people need to stop trusting the pre draft rankings and just go with the flow of the draft if you will. Obviously the NHL teams know more about everything than THN or TSN does, so why do we ridicule the NHL teams based on their predictions?

 

[Hooliganx3]

Saying a pick is "off the board" has never quite made much sense to me. Why do we as fans think we know more about the draftees than the actual NHL teams? I mean really, obviously the blues saw/see something in Schmaltz that make him good enough to be a 1st rounder. They obviously liked him more than Gaunce at center and obviously think he'll be a good player in the NHL, so why is it an off the board pick? Because the hockey news didn't have him ranked in the top 35? I think people need to stop trusting the pre draft rankings and just go with the flow of the draft if you will. Obviously the NHL teams know more about everything than THN or TSN does, so why do we ridicule the NHL teams based on their predictions?

Most pre draft rankings have a lot of input from very knowledgable hockey scouts. Different scouts have different opinions on different players. To say our scouts our vastly superior to other scouts is a little smug.

Our scouts may end up being right but there is just as equal of a chance of the other scouts being right.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

Most pre draft rankings have a lot of input from very knowledgable hockey scouts. Different scouts have different opinions on different players. To say our scouts our vastly superior to other scouts is a little smug.

Our scouts may end up being right but there is just as equal of a chance of the other scouts being right.

I get that, its just the people who think they are more knowledgeable than the actual NHL teams that make me a little uneasy. The blues wouldnt have picked schmaltz if they knew there were better players out there or better players at a position of need.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Saying a pick is "off the board" has never quite made much sense to me. Why do we as fans think we know more about the draftees than the actual NHL teams? I mean really, obviously the blues saw/see something in Schmaltz that make him good enough to be a 1st rounder. They obviously liked him more than Gaunce at center and obviously think he'll be a good player in the NHL, so why is it an off the board pick? Because the hockey news didn't have him ranked in the top 35? I think people need to stop trusting the pre draft rankings and just go with the flow of the draft if you will. Obviously the NHL teams know more about everything than THN or TSN does, so why do we ridicule the NHL teams based on their predictions?

"Off the board" is a reference to the Blues valuing a player higher relative to the general "consensus" across the scouting community. The Blues aren't the only team that has scouts, and the opinion of scouts can vary widely on a single player.

For anyone who's interested, it's very easy for the general public to get a feel for how a prospect is viewed by the scouting community nowadays. You can reach out to/follow scouts yourself on twitter, talk to them on forums like this one, or read the summaries of those who routinely talk to them. There are also plenty of ex-scouts/GMs/etc. out there who are paid to provide information to the public about these things that one can access for free.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to consider Schmaltz an off the board pick (which I do myself).

 

[EastonBlues22]

I get that, its just the people who think they are more knowledgeable than the actual NHL teams that make me a little uneasy. The blues wouldnt have picked schmaltz if they knew there were better players out there or better players at a position of need.

I like to think the Blues adhere to the BPA drafting ideology based on their board. If their first pick in consecutive drafts is a long-term puck moving defenseman project, then there's a good chance they're over-valuing that sort of prospect relative to other teams if they're going by the BPA philosophy.

Maybe that relative over-valuing is an insightful exploitation of an under-valued commodity, and maybe it is a misguided attempt to outsmart the competition. At this point, we don't know. All we know is that the Blues seem to have a different perspective, and I think it's fine to question that.

 

[Hooliganx3]

I like to think the Blues adhere to the BPA drafting ideology based on their board. If their first pick in consecutive drafts is a long-term puck moving defenseman project, then there's a good chance they're over-valuing that sort of prospect relative to other teams if they're going by the BPA philosophy.

Maybe that relative over-valuing is an insightful exploitation of an under-valued commodity, and maybe it is a misguided attempt to outsmart the competition. At this point, we don't know. All we know is that the Blues seem to have a different perspective, and I think it's fine to question that.

If you go back to his Dallas days it does seem like more often then not he does draft defenseman first in the Drafts. All of his 1st round picks have been defenseman in his GM career. It could just happen to be something random or it could reflect his drafting preference.

He's a list of his Dallas drafting for anyone interested

http://www.defendingbigd.com/2012/5...t-the-doug-armstrong-years-failure-or-success

He had some great success with wingers in the 2nd round or later. Seems like it may be the same story here with Rattie and Jaskin and possibly Carrier in the future.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

I just don't think the people that call the Schmaltz pick "bad" strictly because of where he was ranked by the community is fair. That's all I'm saying.

 

[rumrokh]

I just don't think the people that call the Schmaltz pick "bad" strictly because of where he was ranked by the community is fair. That's all I'm saying.

I'm with you on this, but that doesn't mean that Schmaltz is a better prospect than Vannelli is, either.

 

[Prussian_Blue]

I think Gardiner may actually shoot up the lists eventually like Jaskin . He had a solid NCAA season last year for his first NCAA season. It may be more hope as well since he is a playmaking center with good size something we could really use.

Last year wasn't Gardiner's first NCAA season... in 2010-11 he was a freshman at Minnesota and didn't get much ice time, so he spent 2011-12 with Dubuque of the USHL and then transferred to Penn State.

 

[Prussian_Blue]

The voting list was a bit sparse because the top prospects are fairly defined, but I'm going to widen the list significantly moving forward.

The add list includes:
MacEachern
McRae
Fairchild
Wannstrom
Lundstrom
Tesink
Gardiner
Grachev
Ponich
Lindbohm

Let me know if there's anyone else out there you would like to see go up on the board as a possible top 15 prospect. We can add even more later if we want as we start rounding out the top 20 (and perhaps beyond).

Take McRae off, as he's left the organization to play in Finland.

 

[BlueDream]

Appears I went against the mainstream on this one I went with Edmundson.

Same. I love his game.

 

[tfriede2]

Take McRae off, as he's left the organization to play in Finland.

We still own his rights, so he is still our prospect. He's just as much of a prospect as Lindbohm is (who I don't believe has signed his ELC with us yet).

 

[JustOneB4IDie]

Hakanpaa is my choice for #6, then Carrier.

 

[bluesfan94]

Take McRae off, as he's left the organization to play in Finland.

If we kept Junland on these lists, it'd be silly not to keep McRae.

 

[aceoutdoor]

Why is Lundstrom not on the list?

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I think the lists should rate all Blues property. People can modify their ratings by how likely they think the player is to develop into an NHL player and that includes whether they'll come to North America, etc. McRae's chances have taken a dip, but its not impossible.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Since this poll is a good deal closer, I'm going to leave it up until sometime after midnight tonight. We'll have a new one for tomorrow.

 

[Prussian_Blue]

We still own his rights, so he is still our prospect. He's just as much of a prospect as Lindbohm is (who I don't believe has signed his ELC with us yet).

1. McRae was at the end of his ELC this season, and was an RFA. The Blues did not re-sign him. "We" no longer have his rights.

2. Lindbohm was drafted one year ago, in the late rounds. It's not likely he will be offered an ELC any sooner than the end of this season.

 

[Prussian_Blue]

If we kept Junland on these lists, it'd be silly not to keep McRae.

Keeping Junland on the lists is silly, too.

As is keeping Lehtera on the list.

The Blues still have Viktor Alexandrov, Dimitri Semin, Evgeny Skachkov and Konstantin Barulin on their "Prospect" page at their web site. None of those players will ever play a game as a professional under contract to the Blues. That's not a "prospect," AFAIC.

 

[tfriede2]

1. McRae was at the end of his ELC this season, and was an RFA. The Blues did not re-sign him. "We" no longer have his rights.

2. Lindbohm was drafted one year ago, in the late rounds. It's not likely he will be offered an ELC any sooner than the end of this season.

Did we not qualify him with a QO offer and thus retain his rights? He is not a UFA; he is still our prospect.

 

[SirPaste]

We still have McRae's rights

 

[STL fan in MN]

McRae was qualified so he's technically still a Blues prospect. He's way down the list for me though.

For the 6th spot, I find it interesting how many have chosen Carrier over Vannelli considering about a month ago, the Blues chose Vannelli ahead of Carrier. I suppose Carrier is a bit of a "safer" pick though. Still, an interesting observation IMO.

For me, I see this next tier as Carrier, Hakanpaa, Schmaltz, Vannelli and Fairchild. I view all of those guys pretty evenly.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

McRae was qualified so he's technically still a Blues prospect. He's way down the list for me though.

For the 6th spot, I find it interesting how many have chosen Carrier over Vannelli considering about a month ago, the Blues chose Vannelli ahead of Carrier. I suppose Carrier is a bit of a "safer" pick though. Still, an interesting observation IMO.

For me, I see this next tier as Carrier, Hakanpaa, Schmaltz, Vannelli and Fairchild. I view all of those guys pretty evenly.

I don't see Fairchild as much of a prospect anymore IMO. I really don't see him making much of an NHL impact if any. Not only did he play mediocre last year, but Hakanpaa and Edmundson have came to overtake his spot in the depth chart if you will.

I think Cody Beach is a player I think could really sneak into the NHL soon and be a solid 4th line player. Won't do much besides fight, but he has a skill at using his size that could make him very intriguing. I think he's a solid prospect, as is Vellieux.

 

[rumrokh]

McRae was qualified so he's technically still a Blues prospect. He's way down the list for me though.

For the 6th spot, I find it interesting how many have chosen Carrier over Vannelli considering about a month ago, the Blues chose Vannelli ahead of Carrier. I suppose Carrier is a bit of a "safer" pick though. Still, an interesting observation IMO.

For me, I see this next tier as Carrier, Hakanpaa, Schmaltz, Vannelli and Fairchild. I view all of those guys pretty evenly.

Lots of teams choose to let players of similar quality go with the belief that they can get them later. For all we know, they had Vannelli and Carrier ranked exactly the same and erred on the side of the defenseman.

These rankings are also necessarily going to fluctuate. Not just because of new draftees, but because guys develop at different rates. In a way, these rankings are more about a snapshot of evidence in a player's development than they are about truly predicting value five+ years from now. There's more tangible evidence for fans to grasp in favor of Carrier right now.

I'm not sure if I'd put Fairchild quite among those guys. His development stalled a bit, but he's not that far out of the conversation. Edmundson, Binnington, and Lundstrom are arguable inclusions in that group, too.

 

[Celtic Note]

Lots of teams choose to let players of similar quality go with the belief that they can get them later. For all we know, they had Vannelli and Carrier ranked exactly the same and erred on the side of the defenseman.

These rankings are also necessarily going to fluctuate. Not just because of new draftees, but because guys develop at different rates. In a way, these rankings are more about a snapshot of evidence in a player's development than they are about truly predicting value five+ years from now. There's more tangible evidence for fans to grasp in favor of Carrier right now.

I'm not sure if I'd put Fairchild quite among those guys. His development stalled a bit, but he's not that far out of the conversation. Edmundson, Binnington, and Lundstrom are arguable inclusions in that group, too.

I really believe they need to quit doing that. Defensemen are much easier to find in rounds 2-5 and much harder to predict.