Can you beat this prospects line-up?

Status
Not open for further replies.

clefty

Retrovertigo
Dec 24, 2003
18,009
3
Visit site
Drake1588 said:
Well, Eminger and Semin are only 20 years old, and have appeared in only 57 and 52 NHL games, respectively. Both finished the season in the AHL working on their games, honing the rough edges.

Now Brian Sutherby is 22 and he is the closest to shedding the prospect label... but on the other hand, he only played 30 games in the NHL last season, with minimal fourth-line ice time, and finished the 2003-04 season in the AHL, before he sustained a groin injury. He may be getting a little older, but he has hardly reached the level of an NHL regular yet.

But the Pens team could then include Malone, Koltsov, Surovy, Abid, Orpik and Caron. The criteria used by everyone else would eliminate those type of players.
 

thestonedkoala

Guest
Dear God I'm not even going to post what the Wild lineup would look like...Our forward core looks like Iraq...
 

Pengunz

Registered User
Jul 22, 2004
8
0
I hardly think just because a player has played under 100 or even 50 games that
he is no longer a prospect especially when they are 23 or younger! tell that to
the 30 GM'S around the league and they would laugh at you :lol:
 

moosefan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,890
1
Halifax, Nova Scotia
perin said:
Anton Babchuk | Brent Seabrook
Cam Barker | Michal Barinka
James Wisniewski | Duncan Keith

That is some awesome potential on D.

that defense in the future could be one of the best in the NHL if all do what they are suppose to. That is down right scary to have such awsome defensive talent like that in the system.
 

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,083
2,432
Northern Virginia
moosefan said:
that defense in the future could be one of the best in the NHL if all do what they are suppose to. That is down right scary to have such awsome defensive talent like that in the system.
Vandermeer is still reasonably young as well. Chicago has the league's best young core of players at defense in my opinion, coupled with a nice, deep group of forward prospects with some jam. It looks very much like Chicago hit a home run at forward, after selecting D Barker early, in this past draft. Good stuff.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
montreal said:
There's really no such thing as the top group of prospects, as it's all based on potential or upside, which in reality doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Yes there are teams with more depth then others, or teams with better top end talent then others and that will likely always be the case. What you get here goes from discussing teams prospects to a pissing match with ra ra chants of my teams better then yours. But it's fun to read some comments. :banana:

Agreed Montreal. I think alot of prospect talk is mostly biased talk.

Saying Montreal is the deepest and most standout team prospect wise is unfounded.

Yes there upside is great, but so is any other teams prospects, except the Avalanche, Maple Leafs and the Hurricanes for the most part :)

I could sit here all day and toot the Sharks horn and tell you how great of "upside" each player has and give alot of them the benifit of the down...but I choose not to.

I try to keep my coments about Sharks prospects tight lipped because I do in fact wear teal shaded glasses.

But for the record :) I wanted Michalek over Vanek in 2003, and this year I had Kaspar ranked 19th in my top 60 :) lol.

If I had to take teams on their prospects, I would say please give me Chicago....my 2nd choice would be Washington.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
i doubt that. it's natural to overrate your own prospects, though. you're certainly not the only one who does it.

Thats what people were saying me before HF rank us #1 ;)
 

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Thats what people were saying me before HF rank us #1 ;)


you've got to be new around here if you give much credence to HF's organizational rankings. montreal shouldn't be in the top five, and teams with much better prospect pools aren't even in the top ten.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
you've got to be new around here if you give much credence to HF's organizational rankings. montreal shouldn't be in the top five, and teams with much better prospect pools aren't even in the top ten.

Thats what I said, you are an anti-Habs and a total ignorant guy about prospects.

From Toronto?
 

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Thats what I said, you are an anti-Habs and a total ignorant guy about prospects.

From Toronto?


i'm not anti habs at all, and no..i'm not from toronto. i'm in the position to view this completely objectively...and objectively...montreal is behind Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington, Atlanta, Nashville and Florida. I'd rank them in with the next teams...San Jose, Columbus, Buffalo, Edmonton. It's hard to determine an exact ranking, but it's not hard to see that montreal isn't the best.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
i'm not anti habs at all, and no..i'm not from toronto. i'm in the position to view this completely objectively...and objectively...montreal is behind Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington, Nashville and Florida. I'd rank them in with the next teams...San Jose, Buffalo, Edmonton. It's hard to determine an exact ranking, but it's not hard to see that montreal isn't the best.

Did you see some of our prospects recently? Because I can make you meet some of ours...
 

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Did you see some of our prospects recently? Because I can make you meet some of ours...


alright, let's break this down.

Higgins - Plekanec - Kostitsyn

Higgins likely has third line potential...MAYBE second, but most likely third. Tomas Plekanec could be a second line center. Kastitsyn is the best of the three. On this first line, you've got one high-end prospect and two average ones.

Hossa - Chipchura - Perezhogin

Marcel Hossa...are we still waiting for him to be anything more than a glorified AHL forward? If he weren't a Hossa, no one would even mention him. Chipchura is a prospect I love...for his heart...but he's got third line captain written all over him. Not a bad thing to have. Perezhogin...had an obvious setback this year. Incidents like that one can have a pretty adverse affect.



Lambert - Locke - Urquhart

I like Locke, Lambert and Urquhart are average prospects

Bonneau - Lapierre - Ferland

here's where things really fall apart. No one outside Montreal cares about these three.

Hainsey O'Byrn

Korneev Archer

Korpikari Yemelin

Hainsey is the best of the bunch, and that isn't saying much.

Danis
Lindberg
Halak

I actually think Halak is the best of this bunch...but in comparison to some of the others....this is another weak spot. There's no Fleury, no Lehtonen, no Oullette.


with all that said, Montreal has some great prospects..but top to bottom...they aren't even close to being the "best in the league," and most of the more sensible Habs fans have admitted as much.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
alright, let's break this down.



Higgins likely has third line potential...MAYBE second, but most likely third. Tomas Plekanec could be a second line center. Kastitsyn is the best of the three. On this first line, you've got one high-end prospect and two average ones.



Marcel Hossa...are we still waiting for him to be anything more than a glorified AHL forward? If he weren't a Hossa, no one would even mention him. Chipchura is a prospect I love...for his heart...but he's got third line captain written all over him. Not a bad thing to have. Perezhogin...had an obvious setback this year. Incidents like that one can have a pretty adverse affect.





I like Locke, Lambert and Urquhart are average prospects



here's where things really fall apart. No one outside Montreal cares about these three.



Hainsey is the best of the bunch, and that isn't saying much.



I actually think Halak is the best of this bunch...but in comparison to some of the others....this is another weak spot. There's no Fleury, no Lehtonen, no Oullette.


with all that said, Montreal has some great prospects..but top to bottom...they aren't even close to being the "best in the league," and most of the more sensible Habs fans have admitted as much.

Fine...

Now I would want you compare Higgins to Upshall, Plekanec to Ribeiro and Perezhogin to Balej for fun...

I just want to learn more about your judgement...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Fine...

Now I would want you compare Higgins to Upshall and Perezhogin to Balej for fun...

I just want to learn more about your judgement...


Upshall is a considerably better prospect than Higgins, though they're of the same mold...but look at where they were selected. it's to be expected. As for Balej...every Habs fan bowed to that guy until he was traded...then all of a sudden, he was mysteriously "expendable." Ironically, he's a prospect I really liked\like. I think Perezhogin has a similar skillset...but the difference is that Balej hasn't wacked anyone over the head with a stick, and didn't lose the respect of many of his peers in the hockey world.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
Upshall is a considerably better prospect than Higgins, though they're of the same mold...but look at where they were selected. it's to be expected. As for Balej...every Habs fan bowed to that guy until he was traded...then all of a sudden, he was mysteriously "expendable." Ironically, he's a prospect I really liked\like. I think Perezhogin has a similar skillset...but the difference is that Balej hasn't wacked anyone over the head with a stick, and didn't lose the respect of many of his peers in the hockey world.

Do you know how high I was on Balej 2 years ago even when he struggled in the AHL? Do you know that when he got traded, he was ranked something like 6th or 8th in our depth chart? Do you know we got Kovalev for him?

Now saying that Upshall is a signifiant better prospect than Higgins is totally biaised as you suggest that I am, they are both skilled, undersized, hart and soul bright 2-way foward with leadership and caractere, great skating, both captain of their country at WJC ect ect...

Now you have to make the difference between a mediocre, a poor, an average, a good and a great first second or third liner... For exemple, Lambert has second or third line potentiel... Does it means he is as NHL ready as Higgins? Does it means he is an as great prospect?

Thats where you are playing... And I wont play this way with you anymore!
 

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Do you know how high I was on Balej 2 years ago even when he struggled in the AHL? Do you know that when he got traded, he was ranked something like 6th or 8th in our depth chart? Do you know we got Kovalev for him?

Now saying that Upshall is a signifiant better prospect than Higgins is totally biaised as you suggest that I am, they are both skilled, undersized, hart and soul bright 2-way foward with leadership and caractere, great skating, both captain of their country at WJC ect ect...

Now you have to make the difference between a mediocre, a poor, an average, a good and a great first second or third liner... For exemple, Lambert has second or third line potentiel... Does it means he is as NHL ready as Higgins? Does it means he is an as great prospect?

Thats where you are playing... And I wont play this way with you anymore!

this has nothing to do with bias. upshall scored almost as many goals in 30 games as higgins did in almost 70. 8 less, in fact. look, it's obvious that nothing is going to placate you outside my saying, "you know what, you're right..the habs do have the best prospects in the league," so there's really no point in carrying this on any further. if that's what you want to hear...fine. i'm just not sure what the reward in that is.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
this has nothing to do with bias. upshall scored almost as many goals in 30 games as higgins did in almost 70. 8 less, in fact. look, it's obvious that nothing is going to placate you outside my saying, "you know what, you're right..the habs do have the best prospects in the league," so there's really no point in carrying this on any further. if that's what you want to hear...fine. i'm just not sure what the reward in that is.

You have to take in consideration that Higgins was used like a center in the first half of the season, he was centering 75% of the time the third line with players like Milroy, Ferland, Suomerovi, Dwyer, Olvestad as wingers... Gratton - Plekanec and Svitov were all more experienced centers above of him... You have to take in consideration that Upshall only played 31 games and was only +1 on a very good team where other players were on the clearly positive side...

Higgins, Chris C 67 21 27 48 +16 0.72 point per game

Upshall, Scottie LW 31 13 11 24 +1 0.77 points per game

Higgins has been moved LW toward the 3/4 of the season on the 2nd line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rowsdower

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
4,351
0
Arizona Bay
Visit site
NewHabsArea said:
Thats what I said, you are an anti-Habs and a total ignorant guy about prospects.

From Toronto?

What makes him ignorant? The fact he doesn't agree with you? Why don't you tell us what makes the Habs prospect group so special.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
Rowsdower said:
What makes him ignorant? The fact he doesn't agree with you? Why don't you tell us what makes the Habs prospect group so special.

Mainly his exceptionnal bunch of fowards that contain some quality NHLers...

Defensively we lack offensively minded D-Mens since Hainsey is'nt high in my mind (attitude and work ethic probs) and Korneev as undersized still have alot to prove.. But we got some overall quality defenseman in O'Byrn, Korpikari and Archer...

In net, we are fine as well with Danis, Lindberg and Halak..

Guys like Urquhart, Lapierre and Lambert are still unknow but you will ear more about them in the near future.. Urquhart has been an early second rounder selection in a very deep 2003 draft, has been selected above guys like Bergeron, Tunik, Fritsche, Hennessey, Vrana... Nothing wrong about Urquhart's developpement, he will have to improve on his physical play and intensity but we got a highly talended 6"3 200 lbs guys with some incredible hands...

Lapierre is a Stone type of player with better skating skills, I personnally think he is our futur third line center and Lambert improved alot over the last few years... I was'nt very high on him but last year was a breakout for him, he learned under Vigneault and you have a very underrated prospect here... He will spend the next year in Hamilton and I expect him being a more important player than a guy like Milroy... he has size, skating, stickhandling and shooting skills! He was the guy I thought he deserved to get an invitation at the last WJC among all our CHL prospects.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
Mainly his exceptionnal bunch of fowards that contain some quality NHLers...

Defensively we lack offensively minded D-Men since Hainsey is'nt high in my mind (attitude and work ethic probs) and Korneev as undersized still have alot to prove.. But we got some overall quality defenseman in O'Byrn, Korpikari and Archer...

In net, we are fine as well with Danis, Lindberg and Halak..


but that's my point. you're acting as if i said montreal's prospects were BAD. i said just the opposite! i conceded that they have some an overall good set of prospects...and that i think they'd fall somewhere around 8th. the only thing i disputed was that they're "the best," when they're nowhere near the best. i don't see what you're getting so worked up about. it's as if i said you guys were on level with the Avs prospects.
 

NewHabsEra*

Guest
nomorekids said:
but that's my point. you're acting as if i said montreal's prospects were BAD. i said just the opposite! i conceded that they have some an overall good set of prospects...and that i think they'd fall somewhere around 8th. the only thing i disputed was that they're "the best," when they're nowhere near the best. i don't see what you're getting so worked up about. it's as if i said you guys were on level with the Avs prospects.

I never said we were the absolute #1, I only asked people to try to make a better line-up than the one I did...

Personnally I think we are clearly in the top 5, I would say #3 or #4 overall to be more accurate... Kostitsyn and Perezhogin are both solid first liner prospects with top level skills for exemple...
 

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
NewHabsArea said:
I never said we were the absolute #1, I only asked people to try to make a better line-up than the one I did...

Personnally I think we are clearly in the top 5, I would say #3 or #4 overall to be more accurate... Kostitsyn and Perezhogin are both solid first liner prospects with top level skills for exemple...


well, as i said...i think that washington, pittsburgh and chicago clearly have better prospects. nashville, florida, columbus, atlanta and philadelphia have arguably better prospects, overall. i just can't see montreal being 3 or 4. i'll admit that you have two great first line prospects...but nashville has 3 guys that most consider first pairing d-men. columbus has about 4 first line prospects(and picard\zherdev is a pairing i'd place above katsitsyn and perezhogin). atlanta has possibly the best goalie prospect in the world and two terrific defensive prospects in valabik and coburn. that said...while montreal has those two can't-miss guys...they're thin defensively after hainsey. there is no rounding. to go back to the teams i mentioned....and their strengths...they also have strengths in other areas. nashville has two potential first line snipers in shishkanov and radulov and one of the best goalies in finland in teemu lassila. columbus drafted some solid defensemen and still have leclaire in goal on the prospect level. atlanta has guys like tomi santala and jim slater among their forwards. this isn't even mentioning the teams that clearly have better prospects in pittsburgh, washington and chicago. montreal has some great players, but top to bottom, they don't stack up against the big three. i'd rank it like this:

1. Washington
2. Pittsburgh
3. Chicago
4. Philadelphia
5. Nashville
6. Columbus
7. Florida
8. Atlanta
9. Montreal
10. New Jersey
11. Buffalo
12. San Jose
13. NYR
14. LA
15. Ottawa
 

Ajacied

Stay strong Appie! ❤
Apr 6, 2002
25,136
911
Netherlands
I wonder where the Stars new defense ranks among the organisations. I had it around 25 prior to the draft, but I'm liking what we have on the blueline right now.
 

cj

Registered User
Jul 17, 2004
130
0
Hello, I'm new here, but if you don't mind, I'm going to jump right in. :)

To the thread starter, I'm curious why you're so concerned about Montreal's prospect depth being the best in the league?

It's no secret that Montreal's prospect rating will drop significantly next year. But the good news is, that's not because several of their prospects became busts, it's because some of their top prospects joined the NHL. Komisarek and Ryder have graduated already and Hainsey and Hossa will get permanent roster spots next year. The Habs are no-longer a bottom-feeder team looking towards a future 5 years down the line. They're already a competitive team and they should only get better. How can this be a bad thing? There's no need to have the best prospect depth in the NHL when you've got a great group of young players already on your roster. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->