So a 6'4" 18 year old skates like an average NHL'er. Sounds pretty good to me for guy that size! Most guys that size and age are below average skaters.
You have must missed the paragraph on him going into more detail.
Corey Pronman’s final top 151
- Thread starter EichHart
- Start date
So a 6'4" 18 year old skates like an average NHL'er. Sounds pretty good to me for guy that size! Most guys that size and age are below average skaters.
You have must missed the paragraph on him going into more detail.
I don’t always agree with all of Pronman’s takes either, but it’s always silly seeing random HFboards poster #2538 claiming Pronman knows absolutely nothing. The dude’s job is following and writing about prospects. He’s obviously going to have done his homework.
Getting the quick snapshot in those categories paints a really rough picture of what Edvinsson looks like as a prospect in Pronman's mind. What I take away as a reader is simply: he will not excel at a high level in any particular area, but he also won't be behind the eight ball either. And then when he types up a bit more of a synopsis like...
"Edvinsson was impressive in the junior ranks in Sweden. He was good, but not amazing at varying pro levels and was an anchor for Sweden’s U18 team internationally. He stands out instantly as a 6-foot-4 defenseman with legit offensive skill. It’s rare to see a player his size lead a rush or make a play off the blue line and dangle through opponents consistently like he does. Edvinsson is also quite a good skater for his size. His straightaway speed is just OK, but he’s got great edgework, showing the first step and quick turns to elude pressure and create clean exits and entries. Defensively his size and skating allow him to close gaps and make a lot of stops and he’s not afraid to be physical. He’s not a dynamic playmaker, but Edvinsson can make the heads-up first pass and shows some power-play poise. In a sentence, Edvinsson projects as a quality top-four defenseman and on a power-play unit with the potential to play higher in an NHL lineup"
...it refines the picture and gives more detail and the nuance that you crave so desperately.
Maybe you could try reading, analyzing, cross referencing with other sources, or you know, do your own viewings and research instead of acting like Pronman's job is to spoon feed you infallible breakdowns and the full book on every prospect.
Ed Ned and Leddy
Brokering the Bally Sports + Corncob TV Merger
No, I didn't miss that paragraph. I particularly enjoyed the sentence where he wrote "Edvinsson is also quite a good skater for his size" after ranking his skating as "average" just a few lines higher. I guess that's not contradictory if we're going to use the most vague terms possible, but if I were authoring paid content I'd probably exercise a bit more attention to detail personally.
Regardless, my broader point was that an "average/below average/above average" scale is very vague and unhelpful, and I felt that his decision to rank Edvinsson "average" in each of those four categories particularly highlighted that vagueness.
People complained last couple times when he used a 20-80 scale. I guess you can't please everyone.
Ed Ned and Leddy
Brokering the Bally Sports + Corncob TV Merger
If that blurb qualifies as "detail and the nuance that I so desperately crave" then I guess we just have different standards for what constitutes "detail" and "nuance" from a paid content provider. To me that paragraph is no more helpful than the dozens of similar free articles out there, or your average hfboards comment to be frank. Is it unfair for me to criticize the Athletic when I feel that their content, which is generally paywalled, is no better than all the free B.S. already out there?
And on the second paragraph, oh please. As if I'm asking anyone to "spoon feed" me. I'm saying it's vague as all hell.
Unfair wouldn't be the word that I would use...but unreasonable absolutely. You don't subscribe to The Athletic's NHL Draft Coverage, you subscribe to The Athletic. They don't consider how you feel about one article produced 2-3 times a year when they are producing dozens upon dozens of pieces on a daily basis. They also aren't advertising themselves as an NHL scouting service. Pronman is a columnist with an emphasis on hockey prospects and has connections to some league sources. He produces his opinion and gives some background on why.
If you feel that disgusted and you want to get full breakdowns and a synopsis of every single player that goes into real depth, may I suggest canceling your subscription and buy a scouting service's product for the same cost as a year's subscription to The Athletic's entire catalog of sports coverage...
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 5,770
- 5,318
I always see Pronman posted around here, so I was curious to see how his predictions have held up. I looked at the 2017 draft, since we're nearing 5 years out, so we have a good idea what these players will become.
His top 10:
1. Hischier
2. Patrick
3. Tippet
4. Tolvanen
5. Kostin
6. Vilardi
7. Liljegrin
8. Necas
9. Glass
10. Yamamoto
Notable:
13. Makar
16. Heiskanen
18. Pettersson
Woof.
His top 10:
1. Hischier
2. Patrick
3. Tippet
4. Tolvanen
5. Kostin
6. Vilardi
7. Liljegrin
8. Necas
9. Glass
10. Yamamoto
Notable:
13. Makar
16. Heiskanen
18. Pettersson
Woof.
Ed Ned and Leddy
Brokering the Bally Sports + Corncob TV Merger
Fair enough. I take your point that, because the Athletic covers sports more broadly, subscribers shouldn't expect depth on par with subject-specific content providers.
Even by that standard, I find this article pretty shoddy and vague. That said I'll probably leave it at that to avoid derailing this thread into a conversation on journalism.
I don't think he could have done worse if he tried lol
Beniers sure isn't an average skater. Svechkov and Johnston aren't below average, to my eyes.
Last edited:
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 5,770
- 5,318
Monsieur Verdoux
Registered User
He have had some good draft years too. But if you want to downgrade him that's a good year to pick.
Pavels Dog
Registered User
Sounds like Pronman’s assessment of Moritz Seider, so Edvinsson is probably going to be the steal of the draft.
This is cringeworthy bad...like I may cancel my subscription right now after seeing this, and I'm not even kidding...
Peasy
Registered User
That is actually what I want from a scout.
I like Pronman more in interviews when he walks you through his decision process, and what really gets him going about each player, but his writing in the Athletic is so general and uninformative that I just won't even bother reading it anymore. He needs to learn how to write less mechanically and more honestly.
It's funny, I was wondering if maybe that was an older list that wasn't Pronman's final list. But on this one, it is his final list, and he actually lowered Makar from 13th to 18th!
Not going to get into opinions on Pronman...but I see very little controversial about the posted top 12. If anything that's the near consensus top 10 skaters and top 2 goalies in this draft.
Peasy
Registered User
Yeah haha still not a good look. I think what the other person posted was probably mid season rankings. Cause I remember looking at his list for this draft a year or two ago and didn't recall tolvanen in the top 5.
jfrank21
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2009
- 1,137
- 1,351
To be fair, he openly states how "Average" means NHL average, and that it is a good thing. So saying that the skating is average and then saying that his skating is good for his size are not mutually exclusive.
jfrank21
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2009
- 1,137
- 1,351
Ok, and he had Suzuki higher than he went (turned out pretty freaking good) and Jason Robertson at 23 (who also is doing pretty well). You win some and lose some. I don't agree with him on every evaluation, doesn't mean he's clueless either.
Masked
(Super/star)
You can't even spell the names of the majority of the prospects you named so you might not want to act like you're an expert on how the draft is going to end up.
HughJazz3dg
Registered User
- Jun 27, 2011
- 1,762
- 384
Stuff like this is annoying… He didn’t even suggest Guenther is going 2nd, he just said that’s who he’d take 2nd. In a season with so much unknown, and no clear cut consensus, Guenther at number two isn’t an unbelievable stretch.
I’m not a huge fan of Pronmans rankings, but that doesn’t mean he’s wrong. He’s put in the work, he has an opinion. That’s it.
