Defensemen dominate Anaheim Ducks Preseason Top 20

[HF Article]

Photo: Shea Theodore had a standout junior career, but his AHL production helps him remain the Anaheim Ducks’ top prospect (courtesy of Marissa Baecker/Getty Images)


?

</p>If contenders are built from the goal out, then the league must be a little bit jealous when it comes to the defensive pipeline and the major goaltending prospect the Anaheim Ducks currently hold. It seems like every single year, when everyone would figure the Ducks to go for a forward in the early rounds, they go back to the well and select another highly skilled defenseman.



While several prominent wingers like Nic Kerdiles and Nick Ritchie have made their presence known, the true treasure of the Ducks pipeline is in their deep and talented blueline pool.… read more

The post Defensemen dominate Anaheim Ducks Preseason Top 20 appeared first on Hockey's Future.



More...

Click to read more...

 

[Nurmagomedov]

Good read. Very similar to our board vote rankings.

One question i have regards ranking Brent Gates vs. Sideroff and Terry. Gates not ranked at all while having just been drafted ahead of the two, both of whom are ranked. Is it just an issue of limited exposure to his game on the writer's part or is he really a worse prospect than Helgesen?

 

[Static]

Gibson's 8.0 ceiling is absolutely ridiculous. Come on.

 

[PCDiesel]

Gibson's 8.0 ceiling is absolutely ridiculous. Come on.

Vasilevskiy is given an 8.5 C. If you look at all of the top tier prospects besides Eichel and McDavid, most are given in the 8-8.5 range with a C.

 

[Reveille1984]

Gibson's 8.0 ceiling is absolutely ridiculous. Come on.

How so? Sure he's still very young, but he hasn't exactly lit up the NHL in his limited chances and has also had problems staying healthy lately. I'd say 8.0 is pretty accurate. I don't see him being on the level of guys like Brodeur, Lundqvist, etc.

HF is also more on the conservative side with their rankings, for what it's worth. Their current top prospects list, albeit from last year, don't even have one 9.0 rated player. That will change obviously once guys like McDavid and Eichel are up there, but yeah.

 

[Static]

Because the letter grades are supposed to display the likelihood of reaching a talent ceiling, not the number. The number is supposed to be a prospect's height if everything were to go to plan. My issue is that they have let the "likelihood" rating bleed into the "ceiling" rating.

You're telling me that if everything were to go right that Gibson's ceiling is as an 8.0 rated player, which is simply stated as a "number one goaltender"?

If so, then all of the scouting reports of the last three years have really been pumping this guy's tires.

 

[AngelDuck]

I would have Montour as 8.0D (instead of 7.5C) and Gibson as 8.5C

Montour has the skill to score 45 points in the NHL I think. That's very valuable these days with scoring being down so far.

I pretty much agree with the rest of it though

Oh and I'd have Friberg ahead of Roy and Wagner personally

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Because the letter grades are supposed to display the likelihood of reaching a talent ceiling, not the number. The number is supposed to be a prospect's height if everything were to go to plan. My issue is that they have let the "likelihood" rating bleed into the "ceiling" rating.

You're telling me that if everything were to go right that Gibson's ceiling is as an 8.0 rated player, which is simply stated as a "number one goaltender"?

If so, then all of the scouting reports of the last three years have really been pumping this guy's tires.

Exactly. It makes you wonder why they have different ratings.

 

[Paul4587]

Gibson should be number one. Theodore is going to be good but barring health issues Gibson is going to be an above average if not elite starting goalie in the league.

 

[Ducks Nation*]

Gibson should be number one. Theodore is going to be good but barring health issues Gibson is going to be an above average if not elite starting goalie in the league.

Theodore will be our #2 d man after Lindholm imo.

 

[Static]

Exactly. It makes you wonder why they have different ratings.

The system makes sense if the execution is on point. Unfortunately, this site doesn't seem to have a strong enough writing core to edit the work in a manner that keeps things consistent throughout.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Everything we've been told about Gibson says his potential is between 9 and 10. If that makes you, as a writer, shudder, that's what the letter grades are for.

 

[snarktacular]

I feel like Getzlaf was rated 8.0. Different writers and all, but it doesn't seem so bad if you look at it that way.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I feel like Getzlaf was rated 8.0. Different writers and all, but it doesn't seem so bad if you look at it that way.

But that's looking at it after the fact. Getzy wasn't talked about as if he were going to be a franchise guy. 1st liner, sure, and he had his downsides. Gibson, on the other hand. . .

 

[salsa man]

I would have Montour as 8.0D (instead of 7.5C) and Gibson as 8.5C

I'd also change Manson to a 7.0C or 7.5D. 6.0 is much too low.

 

[Vipers31]

Because the letter grades are supposed to display the likelihood of reaching a talent ceiling, not the number. The number is supposed to be a prospect's height if everything were to go to plan. My issue is that they have let the "likelihood" rating bleed into the "ceiling" rating.

You're telling me that if everything were to go right that Gibson's ceiling is as an 8.0 rated player, which is simply stated as a "number one goaltender"?

I have been saying that for years.

I understand the argument against it, sort of, in that especially with goalies, ratings would range mostly between 8.0 F and many 9.5 Ys, which in the end would add little to any conversation. It still might be a more realistic illustration of reality than what we have now. Gibson and Vasilevski are seen as the two best prospects in the position - if Gibson isn't given a ceiling of more than "just" a good starter, does it mean the NHL will be without any new elite goalies in that frame? Of course not. The ceiling ratings are being used as estimated "realistic" ceilings, which simply takes something out of the actual probability rating. It's just not very coherent, IMO.

 

[LuckyDucky]

Just a heads up to the writer, he mentions Theodore as "Thompson" twice; once in Montour's write up and also in Theodore's.

 

[Sojourn]

Theodore will be our #2 d man after Lindholm imo.

I kind of hope that isn't the case.

I love Theodore, but if he's our #2 we probably need to upgrade our blue line. The exception to this might be Lindholm really coming into his own, and hitting an elite level. Alternatively, if Theodore's development just takes a steep turn for the better.

Keep in mind that, developmentally speaking, he's been a solid level below a guy like Fowler at every step. Lindholm is a tougher comparison, because he was in Europe, but he was certainly a much more highly touted prospect. As it stands, Lindholm and Fowler as our 1/2 is perceived as not good enough compared to some of the better teams in the league.

 

[DucksAreCool]

I kind of hope that isn't the case.

I love Theodore, but if he's our #2 we probably need to upgrade our blue line. The exception to this might be Lindholm really coming into his own, and hitting an elite level. Alternatively, if Theodore's development just takes a steep turn for the better.

Keep in mind that, developmentally speaking, he's been a solid level below a guy like Fowler at every step. Lindholm is a tougher comparison, because he was in Europe, but he was certainly a much more highly touted prospect. As it stands, Lindholm and Fowler as our 1/2 is perceived as not good enough compared to some of the better teams in the league.

Not being combative, just curious, who are these better teams in the league who could tout a better top pairing than Lindholm/ Fowler in a few years if they continue to develop?

 

[Sojourn]

Not being combative, just curious, who are these better teams in the league who could tout a better top pairing than Lindholm/ Fowler in a few years if they continue to develop?

The answer to that could vary wildly, depending on how much improvement you're considering. I'd start with how many teams could tout a better 1/2 combination right now, and work from there.

 

[Ducks Nation*]

I kind of hope that isn't the case.

I love Theodore, but if he's our #2 we probably need to upgrade our blue line. The exception to this might be Lindholm really coming into his own, and hitting an elite level. Alternatively, if Theodore's development just takes a steep turn for the better.

Keep in mind that, developmentally speaking, he's been a solid level below a guy like Fowler at every step. Lindholm is a tougher comparison, because he was in Europe, but he was certainly a much more highly touted prospect. As it stands, Lindholm and Fowler as our 1/2 is perceived as not good enough compared to some of the better teams in the league.

I think Theodore will be better than Vatanen/Fowler from what I have seen

 

[AngelDuck]

Not being combative, just curious, who are these better teams in the league who could tout a better top pairing than Lindholm/ Fowler in a few years if they continue to develop?

Keith/Seabrook
Doughty/Muzzin
Giordano/Brodie(Hamilton?)
Hedman/Stralman
Suter/Brodin
Pietrangelo/Shattenkirk
Weber/Josi (Jones in the future)
Boychuk/Leddy (Hamonic)
McDonough/Yandle (Staal)


Ekblad/Gudbranson is debateable...I'd take Fowler/Lindholm over them personally
Carlson/Niskanen(Alzner) is also debatable but again I'd take Fowler/Lindholm moving forward

Fowler/Lindholm is a good tandem but certainly not near top 5 in the league yet and maybe not ever

 

[DucksAreCool]

Keith/Seabrook
Doughty/Muzzin
Giordano/Brodie(Hamilton?)
Hedman/Stralman
Suter/Brodin
Pietrangelo/Shattenkirk
Weber/Josi (Jones in the future)
Boychuk/Leddy (Hamonic)
McDonough/Yandle (Staal)


Ekblad/Gudbranson is debateable...I'd take Fowler/Lindholm over them personally
Carlson/Niskanen(Alzner) is also debatable but again I'd take Fowler/Lindholm moving forward

Fowler/Lindholm is a good tandem but certainly not near top 5 in the league yet and maybe not ever

Thanks for this, I have no problem with this list at all now. Chalk me up as one who's very optimistic they could be a top five pairing a few seasons down the line.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I would have Montour as 8.0D (instead of 7.5C) and Gibson as 8.5C

Montour has the skill to score 45 points in the NHL I think. That's very valuable these days with scoring being down so far.

I pretty much agree with the rest of it though

Oh and I'd have Friberg ahead of Roy and Wagner personally

I see Montour as a Vatanen duplicate, but a lil taller. Montour's defense has yet to be assessed appropriately. His offense is amazing, but that defense, though... that kinda matters when you're a defenseman.

8.0 is a #2 defenseman. I don't see that high potential for Montour. The possibility exists, but I've never seen anywhere were Montour is a top 2 defenseman anywhere.

 

[Sojourn]

I think Theodore will be better than Vatanen/Fowler from what I have seen

You do realize that, at the same age, Theodore was worse than Fowler, right? Fowler has been the better player at every step in their development. Which is why I go back to Theodore's developmental curve needing to steepen, for that to happen.

I'd be very surprised if Theodore surpassed Fowler. From what I've seen, Theodore could be the better offensive player, but it's unlikely he has the two-way capability that Cam has. He also shares some of the same weaknesses, in that he doesn't really engage much physically, and he'll rely a lot on positional play, but he isn't as good on his skates, he isn't as mobile, and I'd say they have comparable hockey IQ. Shea kind of looks like a Fowler-lite at this point.

I just assumed your scenario had Fowler being traded, because that's the realistic scenario right now where Theodore is our #2.

Vatanen is another matter, and I see that as a bit closer. In that case, I actually think Theodore could have the edge in terms of two-way play, and offensively I could go either way. I'd lean towards Vatanen, because we've seen what he can do at the NHL level. Theodore has the height and reach, but Vatanen has that fearlessness. I actually, ultimately, see them competing for the same role, and one will likely mean the other is moved.

I think you need to consider how impressive both Fowler and Vatanen were, at the same age as Theodore. And also how many other very impressive young defensemen end up falling short of top pairing status.