Butch's Top Prospects
- Thread starter Butch26
- Start date
I'm wondering if people just look at stats when they make these statement. Look Mcdavid and Look Lafrenière 10 game each and you will see easily the difference between these player?????
Makar seemed like he had great potential but being drafted out of the AJHL he was nowhere near as much of a safe bet as Laf was.
Had him 1st overall at his draft year, but I understand your point. But his skills package was awesome and I remember how much I was hyped by him. Definitely more hype for Makar than now with Lafrenière
Looking good with your Stutzle above Laf ranking. I didn't think too highly of Stutzle cause his stickhandling and shot seemed very vanilla to me. I think Newhook is extremely underrated despite having the best freshman season in an adverse situation too where he had to work his way up from the third line and not getting a ton of pp chances/offensive opportunities til very late.
goldenbladz1
Registered User
- Feb 11, 2015
- 1,598
- 803
Humm good question. I don't think Zegras will be dominant, either Drysdale. I don't think a 21 draft class will dominate and take the calder. Branstrom is ready and legit, Seider could earn it to but I'm worried about his offense so. Not Byfield, not Raymond, maybe Bouchard
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Here's my problem with these lists, and why I generally don't like to comment on them. But I see there's a general discussion about this stuff, so I want to make a point about them.
There's an expectation that people are going to compliment the list people put out. With all due respect to other people, I'm almost certainly not going to agree with most of these lists. If we are talking about a list of 50 and I'd have like 4-5 spots where I'd rank the player in the same spot, how can I call that good when I disagree on so much? If I also fundamentally disagree on one player that I have ranked very low and someone else has ranked very high, can I think a list is good when we have such a fundamental disagreement?
To me, most of these lists are horrible because my own opinion is so different. My opinion on most of the players is not different because it's natural that most people aren't going to throw hot takes out there for most players, but I can't call it good when I disagree with someone on where to place these players. And given that we all have different opinions on certain players, players will inevitably be ranked in different slots. There are maybe a handful or two of lists I've seen in the last few years I would have called good.
If I look for anything with these lists, it's to see what players people have much higher or lower than me, along with any names I might not have on my own list or are on my own list and not on the list of others. Thats where you can actually take something from these lists. If you have Cozens 8 and I have 4, you have Byfield 2 and I have him 5, you have Bouchard 12 and I have him 16, I'm not going to call that good. To me, thats bad. It means we disagree and I don't agree with your list.
I also think these lists are more about people putting their own opinions on paper, and having some reference point to come back to. It's not really for other fans to critique. So I won't say good list because I don't think its a good list (not a criticism of you, a criticism of people making lists), but I will say that I respect that you are willing to put your list here, and put down a reference point for your opinions. I think thats what you should take out of this, not whether I or anyone else here agrees with you. If people are looking at this in a way that I think makes sense, they probably shouldn't agree with your list.
There's an expectation that people are going to compliment the list people put out. With all due respect to other people, I'm almost certainly not going to agree with most of these lists. If we are talking about a list of 50 and I'd have like 4-5 spots where I'd rank the player in the same spot, how can I call that good when I disagree on so much? If I also fundamentally disagree on one player that I have ranked very low and someone else has ranked very high, can I think a list is good when we have such a fundamental disagreement?
To me, most of these lists are horrible because my own opinion is so different. My opinion on most of the players is not different because it's natural that most people aren't going to throw hot takes out there for most players, but I can't call it good when I disagree with someone on where to place these players. And given that we all have different opinions on certain players, players will inevitably be ranked in different slots. There are maybe a handful or two of lists I've seen in the last few years I would have called good.
If I look for anything with these lists, it's to see what players people have much higher or lower than me, along with any names I might not have on my own list or are on my own list and not on the list of others. Thats where you can actually take something from these lists. If you have Cozens 8 and I have 4, you have Byfield 2 and I have him 5, you have Bouchard 12 and I have him 16, I'm not going to call that good. To me, thats bad. It means we disagree and I don't agree with your list.
I also think these lists are more about people putting their own opinions on paper, and having some reference point to come back to. It's not really for other fans to critique. So I won't say good list because I don't think its a good list (not a criticism of you, a criticism of people making lists), but I will say that I respect that you are willing to put your list here, and put down a reference point for your opinions. I think thats what you should take out of this, not whether I or anyone else here agrees with you. If people are looking at this in a way that I think makes sense, they probably shouldn't agree with your list.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Fort Marcy Stakes (Gr. 2) - BELMONT AT THE BIG A - RACE 8Wagers: 2Staked: $5,500.00Event closes- Updated: