Prospect Info: Bruins Prospects XI - Stay on subject!

Status
Not open for further replies.

neelynugs

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
35,390
9,757
Isn't Wheeler typically down on every player tied to the Bruins? IIRC he's a Toronto guy.

i do believe he's a leafs guy, and also seems to slant toward skill only. it's a reasonable
opinion that boston is bottom third in prospect pool, but hard to argue that the b's
develop pro players as good as anyone.
 

Smitty93

Registered User
Dec 6, 2012
8,196
9,361
i do believe he's a leafs guy, and also seems to slant toward skill only. it's a reasonable
opinion that boston is bottom third in prospect pool, but hard to argue that the b's
develop pro players as good as anyone.

Both Pronman and Wheeler focus more on skill and scoring, which is fine because that's the easiest part to scout (or simply read a box score) , but you then have to consider that bias when reading their work. Most rankers focus mostly on the idea of which player is more conventionally talented. Not much thought is put towards scheme fit or the other ways a player can help you win (i.e. defense). The Sweeney management group has shown in their 5 drafts that they have a type when it comes to forwards and defensemen, and that type does not match with many media scouts. We can complain about what that type is, but there's nothing else we can do than hope that they're right.
 

Jim

Registered User
Mar 11, 2002
1,359
671
Rochester NY
Both Pronman and Wheeler focus more on skill and scoring, which is fine because that's the easiest part to scout (or simply read a box score) , but you then have to consider that bias when reading their work. Most rankers focus mostly on the idea of which player is more conventionally talented. Not much thought is put towards scheme fit or the other ways a player can help you win (i.e. defense). The Sweeney management group has shown in their 5 drafts that they have a type when it comes to forwards and defensemen, and that type does not match with many media scouts. We can complain about what that type is, but there's nothing else we can do than hope that they're right.

That’s going to stop working when you have a whole organization full of that “type” after the skill guys they inherited retire or decline. Hopefully, before that happens they find a few guys that make their living putting the puck in the net.
 

ON3M4N

Ignores/60 = Elite
Dec 13, 2015
12,966
17,903
Connecticut
Both Pronman and Wheeler focus more on skill and scoring, which is fine because that's the easiest part to scout (or simply read a box score) , but you then have to consider that bias when reading their work. Most rankers focus mostly on the idea of which player is more conventionally talented. Not much thought is put towards scheme fit or the other ways a player can help you win (i.e. defense). The Sweeney management group has shown in their 5 drafts that they have a type when it comes to forwards and defensemen, and that type does not match with many media scouts. We can complain about what that type is, but there's nothing else we can do than hope that they're right.

They seem more max floor vs max ceiling with guys that play a 200ft game. Almost like a worst case they can still contribute at the NHL level in a bottom 6/3rd pairing role.
 

BruinsNetwork

Guest
That’s going to stop working when you have a whole organization full of that “type” after the skill guys they inherited retire or decline. Hopefully, before that happens they find a few guys that make their living putting the puck in the net.

They have them, certainly in Pastrnak, but also in DeBrusk. Sure, the latter isn't as consistent yet, but he'll get it IMO. The Beecher, Studnicka and Frederic, to an extent, provide a good post-Bergeron blue print for success. Will they have an elite center, aside from the chance of Studnicka turning into one, immediately after the core breaks up? Probably not. However, they'll (hopefully) have a bunch of Coyle-type centers who can keep up with any opponent and grind them down while the skilled wingers get to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanDogBrewin

neelynugs

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
35,390
9,757
They seem more max floor vs max ceiling with guys that play a 200ft game. Almost like a worst case they can still contribute at the NHL level in a bottom 6/3rd pairing role.

they've also been drafting in low spots due to success on the ice. hard to find a stud offensive
player late in the 1st without getting very lucky (pastrnak). i'd always prefer swinging for
the fences once you get to round 5 or so, since you can always find a bottom 6 plug for
peanuts in free agency.
 

Jean_Jacket41

Neely = HOF
Jun 25, 2003
25,502
13,735
With the smurfs
i do believe he's a leafs guy, and also seems to slant toward skill only. it's a reasonable
opinion that boston is bottom third in prospect pool, but hard to argue that the b's
develop pro players as good as anyone.

Usually these lists are biased toward top picks, which the awful teams gets in bunch while top Cup contending teams like Bruins draft later in 1st round or trade their puck.

In the end, Bruins already have their top gem in Pasta and McAvoy already in the lineup and among the best in the league at a very young age. I take that over any hoping list.

Bruins are stacked.

And even if they don’t have anyone on his top 50 list, they have a plethora of good/great options to step in as ELC and surround one if not the best core in NHL.
 

ON3M4N

Ignores/60 = Elite
Dec 13, 2015
12,966
17,903
Connecticut
they've also been drafting in low spots due to success on the ice. hard to find a stud offensive
player late in the 1st without getting very lucky (pastrnak). i'd always prefer swinging for
the fences once you get to round 5 or so, since you can always find a bottom 6 plug for
peanuts in free agency.

I wouldn't disagree, which is why I think they look for max floor with guys. It also helps keep cost in the bottom 6 low when you have young guys coming up. We may hit on some and they'll be to 6 guys but worst case they are good bottom 6 players. Its a smart play
 

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
21,969
16,663
North Andover, MA
We were all talking about the Chara window around here and then they got McAvoy and the Chara window didn’t matter.

Maybe they can pull a rabbit out of their hat and find replacements for Bergeron and Marchand, too. Seems like a tall order to do seamlessly. Doesn’t matter yet, though.
 

member 96824

Guest
they've also been drafting in low spots due to success on the ice. hard to find a stud offensive
player late in the 1st without getting very lucky (pastrnak). i'd always prefer swinging for
the fences once you get to round 5 or so, since you can always find a bottom 6 plug for
peanuts in free agency.

I will say, there are a decent amount of later picks on this list. No one saw Batherson coming so you can’t fault that but for example Kaliyev was right under everyone’s nose. Seems like we’ve had one of those with our last 3 1sts. (Thomas/Vaak, DeBrincat/Frederic, Kaliyev/Beecher)

Wheeler did have Swaydaddy as his #9 goalie so we at least have that
 

Jim

Registered User
Mar 11, 2002
1,359
671
Rochester NY
they've also been drafting in low spots due to success on the ice. hard to find a stud offensive
player late in the 1st without getting very lucky (pastrnak). i'd always prefer swinging for
the fences once you get to round 5 or so, since you can always find a bottom 6 plug for
peanuts in free agency.

I agree completely that our prospect pool is mostly a product of our draft position due to years of success. That’s understandable. At the same time, it doesn’t bother me that we don’t rank higher on prospect lists. The guys that some people talk about as prospects around here...awesome...we drafted a 4th liner. Every team needs them, but they need stars more.

We’ll get our turn. Sooner or later the talent on this team will become slim for a few years and we’ll be drafting higher. Just hope our management isn’t stubborn with the “type” when they get their chance at a ringer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Strafer

Jim

Registered User
Mar 11, 2002
1,359
671
Rochester NY
They have them, certainly in Pastrnak, but also in DeBrusk. Sure, the latter isn't as consistent yet, but he'll get it IMO. The Beecher, Studnicka and Frederic, to an extent, provide a good post-Bergeron blue print for success. Will they have an elite center, aside from the chance of Studnicka turning into one, immediately after the core breaks up? Probably not. However, they'll (hopefully) have a bunch of Coyle-type centers who can keep up with any opponent and grind them down while the skilled wingers get to work.

Which team has had success with that model?

We absolutely have a long term scoring asset in Pastrnak (great pick) and DeBrusk has been secondary scoring at best. Marchand still has some years. The trouble is, you have to continue to stock the shelves. Ours are pretty bare on the top-end talent. We have guys now, and not much coming up. This year, yet again, we’re without a 1st (let alone a decent one).
 

BruinDust

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
24,281
21,610
Which team has had success with that model?

We absolutely have a long term scoring asset in Pastrnak (great pick) and DeBrusk has been secondary scoring at best. Marchand still has some years. The trouble is, you have to continue to stock the shelves. Ours are pretty bare on the top-end talent. We have guys now, and not much coming up. This year, yet again, we’re without a 1st (let alone a decent one).

The St. Louis Blues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruinsNetwork

Estlin

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
5,169
3,990
New York City
I agree completely that our prospect pool is mostly a product of our draft position due to years of success. That’s understandable. At the same time, it doesn’t bother me that we don’t rank higher on prospect lists. The guys that some people talk about as prospects around here...awesome...we drafted a 4th liner. Every team needs them, but they need stars more.

We’ll get our turn. Sooner or later the talent on this team will become slim for a few years and we’ll be drafting higher. Just hope our management isn’t stubborn with the “type” when they get their chance at a ringer.

Well, we've seen in recent drafts that management has indeed been stubborn in that regard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Strafer

neelynugs

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
35,390
9,757
I will say, there are a decent amount of later picks on this list. No one saw Batherson coming so you can’t fault that but for example Kaliyev was right under everyone’s nose. Seems like we’ve had one of those with our last 3 1sts. (Thomas/Vaak, DeBrincat/Frederic, Kaliyev/Beecher)

Wheeler did have Swaydaddy as his #9 goalie so we at least have that

definitely, and i was a big bobby brink fan as well so we'll see in a few years. you think kaliyev's
skating will be good enough at this level? no doubting his ability, just wondering if he can get
to the spots when he needs to get there.
 

member 96824

Guest
definitely, and i was a big bobby brink fan as well so we'll see in a few years. you think kaliyev's
skating will be good enough at this level? no doubting his ability, just wondering if he can get
to the spots when he needs to get there.

With that shot, man it's hard to imagine anything but success. Stick him in the Pasta spot on the PP and he'll net 20 alone. Skating definitely needs work and I can't pretend I've been at home watching Hamilton Bulldogs games but from what I saw it didn't really seem to take the next step but his smarts did.

He'll fit well with any of the bazillion centers with elite upside potential that LA has coming up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->