Prospect Info: CBJ Board 2020 Prospect Rankings: #3

Who is the best prospect of these 5?

  • Daniil Tarasov (G)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Dmitri Voronkov (LW)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    46
  • Poll closed .

Cowumbus

Registered User
Mar 1, 2014
11,502
6,318
Arena District - Columbus
My question is - is he even going to be a Blue Jacket for long? What if we lose him on waivers?

When you've got a 24 year old prospect that you struggle to find a 4th line role for, and he might be lost on waivers, then I think the value to the team is pretty limited.
Yep that’s kind of how I feel as well, I really don’t get how people are adding him already.

But he signed a 2 way deal so waivers shouldn’t matter right?
 

stevo61

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
11,089
12,157
Canada
My question is - is he even going to be a Blue Jacket for long? What if we lose him on waivers?

When you've got a 24 year old prospect that you struggle to find a 4th line role for, and he might be lost on waivers, then I think the value to the team is pretty limited.
Which is frustrating because there is more potential locked in that guy but I never see it coming out. If you could put TFW heart and talent in Stenlunds frame youd have a star. But at the same time those small guys fight for every chance their entire hockey life and its almost like a "hard times create strong men" type of situation. Its nice for the small guys that break through and you get the occasional special player like Fleury or St.Louis
Not to mention TFW has already done more in the AHL after his rookie pro season than Stenlund has to date and he played for years against men
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cowumbus

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,649
Which is frustrating because there is more potential locked in that guy but I never see it coming out. If you could put TFW heart and talent in Stenlunds frame youd have a star. But at the same time those small guys fight for every chance their entire hockey life and its almost like a "hard times create strong men" type of situation. Its nice for the small guys that break through and you get the occasional special player like Fleury or St.Louis
Not to mention TFW has already done more in the AHL after his rookie pro season than Stenlund has to date and he played for years against men

It's true that TFW has already been a better AHLer at a much younger age than Stenlund, but I'm also not ruling out that Stenlund could be one of those guys that just sucks in the AHL. Kukan was not very good down there either. For value to the franchise though it's definitely TFW >> Stenlund. Stenlund at best can replace Riley Nash, and given our depth we'd do better to just ship him out to Detroit for a 3rd rounder or something. TFW has a chance to be so much more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cowumbus

Long Live Lyle

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
1,692
2,038
Chicago, IL
Yep that’s kind of how I feel as well, I really don’t get how people are adding him already.

But he signed a 2 way deal so waivers shouldn’t matter right?

1-way vs 2-way only impacts money made (i.e., you make the same amount whether in the NHL or AHL when on a 1-way contract, you make more when you’re on the NHL roster than you do on the AHL roster when you’re on a 2-way) but it doesn’t impact waiver eligibility. After your ELC, every person has to clear waivers to be sent down, so Stenlund (and Carlsson, for that matter) could now get claimed if sent down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cowumbus

Nanabijou

Booooooooooone
Dec 22, 2009
2,951
619
Columbus, Ohio
Add Stenlund.

And Viqsi, I don't think Knazko is as off the charts as some of your previous ones (Tynan). I was thinking of voting to add him next.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I voted for him in the first round. Peeke has shown he is a legit NHLer, and he’ll likely be 2nd pair RD. To me a 2nd pair RD is more important than all but maybe 4 forwards (legit top line wings and 1C and 2C). For example, right now I’d say Savard is more important than almost all the forwards except PLD. Do the forward prospects have top line potential? Maybe a couple do, but I am more certain that Peeke will be a legit 2nd pair defenseman on the right side than any other prospect will be a legit top line forward.

Or did I misread your post and your IOW is Knazko?

PS: I met T.J. Tynan once. He was really down to earth.
It's Knazko.

* * *​
Knazko?

What do you like about him?
When I see a guy who can skate really well and pass fairly well and has a very good transition game as a defenseman, it makes me feel all warm inside. The actual "defense" part can be taught, after all. The Scouching video on him in particular had me drooling over his potential upside and kind of dismissing concerns about his potential downsides.

Essentially, he's a risk/reward guy for whom I don't think the risks are all that risky.
 

Cowumbus

Registered User
Mar 1, 2014
11,502
6,318
Arena District - Columbus
1-way vs 2-way only impacts money made (i.e., you make the same amount whether in the NHL or AHL when on a 1-way contract, you make more when you’re on the NHL roster than you do on the AHL roster when you’re on a 2-way) but it doesn’t impact waiver eligibility. After your ELC, every person has to clear waivers to be sent down, so Stenlund (and Carlsson, for that matter) could now get claimed if sent down.
Thank you, I didn’t know that.
 

Long Live Lyle

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
1,692
2,038
Chicago, IL
Voted Chinakhov. I actually have him second for us, behind Marchenko and ahead of Foudy. I normally personally rank my choices by something like 65% based on ceiling, 35% based on floor in these rankings. I'm really confident that Marchenko will be at least a second-line player in the NHL, and think he has a really good shot at being a legitimiate first-liner in the 65-70 point range. I think Foudy will be a solid 3rd-liner that can play up in the 2nd-line if necessary, and a great PKer that can make things happen with his speed. So, essentially, I think both Marchenko and Foudy will be NHLers, but with Marchenko "a line higher" in the lineup.

But I think Chinakhov has the highest ceiling of all. I think he could legitimately be a PPG player in this league. His shot is absolutely lethal. And that's why I have him ahead of Foudy. The reason why I still have Marchenko ahead is because I'm really confident Marchenko will be a second-line player and reasonably confident he'll be a first-liner. I don't feel that confident in Chinakhov. But if Chinakhov DOES end up reaching his potential... look out.

For a similar reason, add TFW. I think Stenlund can be an NHL regular, but nothing higher than 4th line. TFW may or may not get there, but he at least has the potential to be Atkinson-like.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,649
It's Knazko.

* * *​

When I see a guy who can skate really well and pass fairly well and has a very good transition game as a defenseman, it makes me feel all warm inside. The actual "defense" part can be taught, after all. The Scouching video on him in particular had me drooling over his potential upside and kind of dismissing concerns about his potential downsides.

Essentially, he's a risk/reward guy for whom I don't think the risks are all that risky.

I wasn't persuaded by Scouch's Report on Knazko, but on your instigation I went through the futurescope profile on Knazko and that did it for me. I'm impressed by the tools. I'll consider voting to add Knazko soon (Viqsi, I thought Fixy would be your new leprechaun :D). Everyone in the 4th round is risky, obviously, and I would say the same thing about Knazko as I said with Pyyhtia - it's hard to see how a player compares when he is playing in a beer league / Finnish junior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viqsi

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,649
Voted Chinakhov. I actually have him second for us, behind Marchenko and ahead of Foudy. I normally personally rank my choices by something like 65% based on ceiling, 35% based on floor in these rankings. I'm really confident that Marchenko will be at least a second-line player in the NHL, and think he has a really good shot at being a legitimiate first-liner in the 65-70 point range. I think Foudy will be a solid 3rd-liner that can play up in the 2nd-line if necessary, and a great PKer that can make things happen with his speed. So, essentially, I think both Marchenko and Foudy will be NHLers, but with Marchenko "a line higher" in the lineup.

But I think Chinakhov has the highest ceiling of all. I think he could legitimately be a PPG player in this league. His shot is absolutely lethal. And that's why I have him ahead of Foudy. The reason why I still have Marchenko ahead is because I'm really confident Marchenko will be a second-line player and reasonably confident he'll be a first-liner. I don't feel that confident in Chinakhov. But if Chinakhov DOES end up reaching his potential... look out.

For a similar reason, add TFW. I think Stenlund can be an NHL regular, but nothing higher than 4th line. TFW may or may not get there, but he at least has the potential to be Atkinson-like.

My sentiments and rankings nearly word for word.

I'm not quite as confident in Marchenko's floor but I'm heavily weighting ceiling here.
 

stevo61

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
11,089
12,157
Canada
It's true that TFW has already been a better AHLer at a much younger age than Stenlund, but I'm also not ruling out that Stenlund could be one of those guys that just sucks in the AHL. Kukan was not very good down there either. For value to the franchise though it's definitely TFW >> Stenlund. Stenlund at best can replace Riley Nash, and given our depth we'd do better to just ship him out to Detroit for a 3rd rounder or something. TFW has a chance to be so much more.
I somewhat agree and disagree. Its no secret his best attribute is his shot but the problem is hes not great at putting himself in positions to use it. There is value in him as a PP option but does he do enough elsewhere to warrant a roster spot? The AHL thing is probably due to the fact Cleveland also doesnt score a lot so without knowing for sure I would guess the PP doesnt get a ton of looks. Also of note hes never really been a huge point producer and I know part of that was due to his speed being reduced due the surgeries but I feel like hes never really grown as a player as one would hope.
I know your voting TFW with me and this is a conversation anyone can feel free to jump into but personally I dont even know if I like Stenlund over MacInnis
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I wasn't persuaded by Scouch's Report on Knazko, but on your instigation I went through the futurescope profile on Knazko and that did it for me. I'm impressed by the tools. I'll consider voting to add Knazko soon (Viqsi, I thought Fixy would be your new leprechaun :D). Everyone in the 4th round is risky, obviously, and I would say the same thing about Knazko as I said with Pyyhtia - it's hard to see how a player compares when he is playing in a beer league / Finnish junior.
That last I file under "I've horribly failed on so many amateur scouting calls that I shouldn't be trusting my own direct evaluations of NHL game translation anyways", personally. ;)

(And is it bad if I admit that TFW is next on my list after Knazko? :D )
 
  • Like
Reactions: majormajor

pled

Registered User
Sep 7, 2009
3,048
891
How is Stenlund still a prospect at 24?
he just turned 24. normaly when the list made or "start of season" of the nhl he would have been 23. also some people still just consider age not important like putting MacInnis in the pool. he is a 2014 draft age and Stenlund a 2015 just like Carlsson or Zach.


pretty surprise there's so many peeke fan or so many chinakhov hater
 

Doggy

Registered User
Oct 11, 2011
3,281
2,324
he just turned 24. normaly when the list made or "start of season" of the nhl he would have been 23. also some people still just consider age not important like putting MacInnis in the pool. he is a 2014 draft age and Stenlund a 2015 just like Carlsson or Zach.

pretty surprise there's so many peeke fan or so many chinakhov hater
I am not looking to diss Stens or MacInnis but in the end (IMO) they are JAGs (Stens is less JAG than MacInnis because it looks like he could be a real contributor on the PP). There's a reason why at age 24+ the two of them are still mostly AHL players.

As for Peeke vs Chinakhov (C), I don't see anyone on here being a Chinakov "hater". Are you referring to the fact that some people voted Peeke over C in this poll? How does that make them "haters"? Peeke was drafted at the top of the second round and had a solid three year run at UND including being named Captain I believe. After a very nice start to his pro career in Cleveland his call up to Columbus was promising...did not look overwhelmed. I think many believe his ceiling is as a second pairing D-Man and that he is NHL ready now. That's a darn good prospect to have in your pipeline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rotsbu and koteka

cslebn

80 forever
Feb 15, 2012
2,695
1,250
he just turned 24. normaly when the list made or "start of season" of the nhl he would have been 23. also some people still just consider age not important like putting MacInnis in the pool. he is a 2014 draft age and Stenlund a 2015 just like Carlsson or Zach.


pretty surprise there's so many peeke fan or so many chinakhov hater

Peeke vs China is a difficult one to me. China clearly has huge potential but he's in the middle of a huge surge so it's hard to know where he lands. Peeke is a safer bet, has already looked the part of an nhler with easy growth to a 3/4. If he hadn't gotten hurt maybe we wouldn't even have him on this list now.

For me I'm leaning more towards sure success and contribution than ceiling with this rank and that's the only reason I put Peeke higher.
 

pled

Registered User
Sep 7, 2009
3,048
891
Peeke vs China is a difficult one to me. China clearly has huge potential but he's in the middle of a huge surge so it's hard to know where he lands. Peeke is a safer bet, has already looked the part of an nhler with easy growth to a 3/4. If he hadn't gotten hurt maybe we wouldn't even have him on this list now.

For me I'm leaning more towards sure success and contribution than ceiling with this rank and that's the only reason I put Peeke higher.
It's a bit hypocrite of me that I feel the same for Foudy vs the Russians haha
 

The Wheelchair

Registered User
Jun 13, 2015
695
298
Ottawa
I think there's also a natural tendency to favour forwards over defensemen. Forwards score goals, they make highlight reels, they're much easier to get excited about from an upside perspective. Peeke is a good, solid defenseman, who should be an NHL contributor very soon, but his skills don't jump off the screen and capture the imagination the way a Marchenko deke or a Chinakhov wrister or a Foody breakaway does.
 

Doggy

Registered User
Oct 11, 2011
3,281
2,324
I think there's also a natural tendency to favour forwards over defensemen. Forwards score goals, they make highlight reels, they're much easier to get excited about from an upside perspective. Peeke is a good, solid defenseman, who should be an NHL contributor very soon, but his skills don't jump off the screen and capture the imagination the way a Marchenko deke or a Chinakhov wrister or a Foody breakaway does.
Agree...and it is easier to quantify a F based on points scored. Less so for D-Man since their primary responsibility is often defense...not offense.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->