Prospect Info: Ducks Prospect Info 2019-2020

Status
Not open for further replies.

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,163
13,179
I like a lot of Pronmans articles but I can’t say that’s his best work. Firstly even without Terry there’s no way we should be ranked outside the top 10. Secondly I question some of his assessments on a few of the players - some of the strengths and weaknesses contradict what other scouts see and what we’ve seen in the NHL from a couple of guys - he seemed a bit off on his assessments of Comtois and Mahura in particular.
 

GreatBear

Registered User
Feb 18, 2009
1,419
1,040
Newport Beach
It is his opinion, so you have to take it for what you think that is worth. I don't agree with him on all of his evaluations, but he is respected. I have been reading all of his rankings and I just don't understand how he ranks some teams' systems, since from his specific team write ups some seem to be ranked either too high or too low based upon his evaluation of prospects.
 

bsu

"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
Sep 27, 2017
28,539
29,291
He also has Terry over Steel

Organizational Top 10 (23 and Under)

  1. Trevor Zegras, C (18)
  2. Ondrej Kase, RW (23)
  3. Troy Terry, RW (21)
  4. Sam Steel, C (21)
  5. Maxime Comtois, LW (20)
  6. Daniel Sprong, RW (22)
  7. Isac Lundestrom, C (19)
  8. Nick Ritchie, LW (23)
  9. Max Jones, LW (21)
  10. Brendan Guhle, D (22)
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,163
13,179
He also has Terry over Steel

Organizational Top 10 (23 and Under)

  1. Trevor Zegras, C (18)
  2. Ondrej Kase, RW (23)
  3. Troy Terry, RW (21)
  4. Sam Steel, C (21)
  5. Maxime Comtois, LW (20)
  6. Daniel Sprong, RW (22)
  7. Isac Lundestrom, C (19)
  8. Nick Ritchie, LW (23)
  9. Max Jones, LW (21)
  10. Brendan Guhle, D (22)

Yeah he’s wrong there too.
 

bsu

"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
Sep 27, 2017
28,539
29,291
I will trust multiple PROFESSIONAL scouts over a hfboard member.
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,163
13,179
I will trust multiple PROFESSIONAL scouts over a hfboard member.

Yeah cool. Never mind that there are multiple PROFESSIONAL scouts (which Pronman isn’t btw) who see it the other way too. The fact that you’re not even willing to acknowledge it’s a debate and legitimate arguments can be made for either side is ridiculous but giving your posting history isn’t surprising.

Also Steel fared a decent amount better at the NHL despite being a year behind in development which you keep ignoring and referring instead to their AHL time.
 

bsu

"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
Sep 27, 2017
28,539
29,291
Yeah cool. Never mind that there are multiple PROFESSIONAL scouts (which Pronman isn’t btw) who see it the other way too. The fact that you’re not even willing to acknowledge it’s a debate and legitimate arguments can be made for either side is ridiculous but giving your posting history isn’t surprising.

Also Steel fared a decent amount better at the NHL despite being a year behind in development which you keep ignoring and referring instead to their AHL time.

you definitely know more than them
 

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,565
12,475
southern cal
Yeah cool. Never mind that there are multiple PROFESSIONAL scouts (which Pronman isn’t btw) who see it the other way too. The fact that you’re not even willing to acknowledge it’s a debate and legitimate arguments can be made for either side is ridiculous but giving your posting history isn’t surprising.

Also Steel fared a decent amount better at the NHL despite being a year behind in development which you keep ignoring and referring instead to their AHL time.

It's his prerogative to "trust" professional scouts over HF members. Also, professional scouts do have varying ratings. That means there is room for debate and legitimate arguments within the confines of professional scouting rankings.

Inserting yourself into the conversation is odd. He doesn't know you or your accolades. Pronman isn't a scout, but he's done a lot of homework based upon what "scouts tell him". So, by proxy, Pronman is a profession reporter of professional scouts.

The best counter to only relying on pro scouts vs HF members in my memory surrounds Lindholm. Although lots of pro scouts had Lindholm as a middle teen draft prospect and TSN piled on by saying he's only got talent for the Tour de France (except Pierre, who said he's a steal at 6th), the HF community from across the pond provided far more in-depth knowledge about Lindholm not found anywhere else as they all reiterated the same scouting profile about Lindholm.

Saying Pronman is wrong seems quite audacious considering how Pronman's been doing this for a while and is hired to do exactly what he does. While you can put up your reasoning why you'd rank Steel over Terry, stating that Pronman is wrong is foolish as you don't know how he does ranking. It seems as though the world revolves around you as opposed to you being a part of the world. B/c you could have easily have proposed that "you" would have rated Steel over Terry and support it instead of stating Pronman is wrong. LoL There's just a difference in opinion is all, but you don't see the difference at all. Pronman's just wrong.
 

duxfan1101

Registered User
Sep 20, 2014
11,585
17,667
California
People get way too worked up over opinionated rankings. It's Pronman's opinion based off of the research he's done and the scouts he's communicated with. Having a different opinion than him is fine, but saying his opinion is wrong is just sour grapes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnfinishedBusiness

Teemu Salami

Empty Ketchup Bottle
May 9, 2013
9,037
308
Orange County, CA
I too like to psychoanalyze hf members. Paul literally said he should be open to debate rather than rely on professionals opinions. Perhaps using the word “wrong” when making prospect rankings is... wrong, but now you’ve stifled somebody elses opinion of someone elses opinion with a weird take about him as a person.

Also summing the whole conversation into “i trust scouts not you” is just as shortsighted, boring, and dismissive as saying Pronman is wrong in a list that is open to discussion.
 
Last edited:
Oct 18, 2011
44,092
9,723
I try not to get super overhyped about our prospects but it sure seems like for whatever reason ours are getting slept on. Our forward prospects have to be near the top right?? Also shouldn't recent development history matter? How the f*** do the king's keep getting ranked ahead? They've developed almost nothing in 5-7 years!!
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,163
13,179
It's his prerogative to "trust" professional scouts over HF members. Also, professional scouts do have varying ratings. That means there is room for debate and legitimate arguments within the confines of professional scouting rankings.

Inserting yourself into the conversation is odd. He doesn't know you or your accolades. Pronman isn't a scout, but he's done a lot of homework based upon what "scouts tell him". So, by proxy, Pronman is a profession reporter of professional scouts.

The best counter to only relying on pro scouts vs HF members in my memory surrounds Lindholm. Although lots of pro scouts had Lindholm as a middle teen draft prospect and TSN piled on by saying he's only got talent for the Tour de France (except Pierre, who said he's a steal at 6th), the HF community from across the pond provided far more in-depth knowledge about Lindholm not found anywhere else as they all reiterated the same scouting profile about Lindholm.

Saying Pronman is wrong seems quite audacious considering how Pronman's been doing this for a while and is hired to do exactly what he does. While you can put up your reasoning why you'd rank Steel over Terry, stating that Pronman is wrong is foolish as you don't know how he does ranking. It seems as though the world revolves around you as opposed to you being a part of the world. B/c you could have easily have proposed that "you" would have rated Steel over Terry and support it instead of stating Pronman is wrong. LoL There's just a difference in opinion is all, but you don't see the difference at all. Pronman's just wrong.

You’ve obviously got no idea of the poster I responded tos history and like the poster completely ignored that other professional scouts see it the other way. And me bluntly saying Pronman is wrong was me referring to this posters posting style where he talks in absolutes, repeating himself over and over again (which is why I responded, because over and over again down the stretch he would repeatedly post in as many threads as he could that Terry>Steel as if it was fact and wouldn’t actually address any responses with anything worthwhile). Obviously I know it’s all opinion.
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,163
13,179
People get way too worked up over opinionated rankings. It's Pronman's opinion based off of the research he's done and the scouts he's communicated with. Having a different opinion than him is fine, but saying his opinion is wrong is just sour grapes.

Again I wasn’t being serious when I bluntly said he was wrong, I was taking the same brash approach that unfinished business takes with 90% of the comments he makes, especially in the Terry vs Steel debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boo Boo

Kalv

Slava Ukraini
Mar 29, 2009
23,592
11,184
Latvia
I try not to get super overhyped about our prospects but it sure seems like for whatever reason ours are getting slept on. Our forward prospects have to be near the top right?? Also shouldn't recent development history matter? How the **** do the king's keep getting ranked ahead? They've developed almost nothing in 5-7 years!!
They changed a lot of personell, IIRC. In that case, past doesn`t matter. Anaheim Ducks was a terrible drafting and development team in Burke era. Did that meant we wouldn`t get immediately better with a change of personnel? And Kings finally don`t trade away their picks.
Kings have a very deep prospect pool. I don`t think they are head and sholders above us, but it`s very justifyable that they are ahead of us in those rankings. Don`t see anything wrong there.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
40,088
35,190
I try not to get super overhyped about our prospects but it sure seems like for whatever reason ours are getting slept on. Our forward prospects have to be near the top right?? Also shouldn't recent development history matter? How the **** do the king's keep getting ranked ahead? They've developed almost nothing in 5-7 years!!
Kings have a deep pool, lot of talent... i have them above us pretty easily. Just on potential of their current prospect pool.
 

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,565
12,475
southern cal
You’ve obviously got no idea of the poster I responded tos history and like the poster completely ignored that other professional scouts see it the other way. And me bluntly saying Pronman is wrong was me referring to this posters posting style where he talks in absolutes, repeating himself over and over again (which is why I responded, because over and over again down the stretch he would repeatedly post in as many threads as he could that Terry>Steel as if it was fact and wouldn’t actually address any responses with anything worthwhile). Obviously I know it’s all opinion.

I don't know about complete history, but I am responding to this particular thread. If you have personal beef with him alone, then DM him. Why do you have to respond? Srsly? Why? Why can't he have a valid opinion and leave it at that? Talent is fluid, not only year after year, but also during the year. If the poster believes Terry > Steel, then you know it's only his opinion. You can have a different opinion and post it. That's what the boards are about. When you and the poster share more info, then it actually benefits all of us on here b/c we're all enlightened. Isn't that what we do in the pre-season poll prospects ranking? I've promoted LaCombe and Janicke to be ranked higher as it's my opinion despite it being a minority, if only, thought that both be ranked higher.

Here's what I read in this particular thread:
1) Poster stated he trusts "professional scouts" only.
2) YOU state Pronman isn't a professional.
3) YOU state Pronman's rankings are WRONG.
4) Afterwards, YOU posit your thoughts as to why Steel > Terry.

It's obvious the poster adhere's to professionals who's on the same thought as his. I can respect that, regardless if I agree or disagree with the projection b/c it's supported work. All I see is YOU stating absolutes. You've placed yourself above Pronman by stating Pronman's rankings are wrong as well as not a professional while YOUR assessment is correct and "as if it was fact".

But hey, with the way you responded, you're never going to admit you did anything wrong as you "rationalized" why you "bluntly" stated "Pronman is wrong" as well as stating Pronman isn't a professional. If you have such a high standard for the poster, then why can't you share the same consistency to yourself? If the poster repeatedly shares that Terry > Steel, then you have the forum to repeatedly share Steel > Terry. If you think the poster is misinformed, then you have the capacity to inform and re-inform with supported sources. But that isn't what you did in this particular instance. You've usurped the standard that Pronman has earned as his professional job and placed yourself above Pronman. I called you out on it and you "rationalized" your nonsensical responses to be legit. You're still perpetuating you're above all as you have no flaws in your "rationalization", so to speak.

I'm just happy to see we have two prospects that are talked highly about that can help the Ducks' future. They're both still young and growing. We have no idea how big a jump in improvement they'll have, or stagnation or regression. They're both talented. If both turn out to be very productive in the NHL, then the both of you are correct. And who can be angry with that? With that said, I'd rank Zegras over both of them at the moment. hahahhahahhaha
 

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,565
12,475
southern cal

It's alright to be skeptical. I don't know much about other teams, but have heard the Kings have some very good prospects before the 2019 NHL draft. In a January 2019 article on TSN, they have a top-50 ranking of prospects. The Kings have four prospects that are ranked 30th, 34th, 43rd, and 44th. On that same top-50 prospects list, the Ducks only have two: Terry at 5th overall and Jones at 50th overall. (Reminder, Steel's second call up to the NHL exceeded expectations about him from the first call up. I re-watched his hat trick game recently.)

Then they added in the 2019 NHL draft C Turcotte (5th overall), D Bjornfot (20th overall), and RW Kaliyev (33rd). All those names are household prospect names. If Kaliyev puts in 100% hustle to his game consistently, then they stole him at 33rd overall. That's a huge "if" and it's the "if" was the reason why he fell to the 33rd overall. I'll admit that the Kings, potentially, have a nice collection of upper tier talent. Nothing wrong with that.

The Ducks do possess talent as well, but it's not as well known. Steel isn't as flashy to grab headlines, but Comtois has been all over the headlines. His year last year was an eye-opener, but even he didn't make the top-50 cut for TSN. Jones being ranked in the top-50 is a headscratcher to me as he's ranked higher than Comtois. Although the Ducks did grab phenom C Zegras in the 2019 draft, they also snagged LW Tracey and D LaCombe - both taken far higher than the majority of mock projections. Heck, I think the same could be said about Steel being drafted earlier than projected as well. They're not well-known prospects like the Kings 2019 draft prospects drafted in the top-40 (they had 3 picks in the top-33 and we had three picks in the top-39). We could have selected Kaliyev at 29th instead of Tracey, but we didn't.

I wouldn't be too concerned, though. Remember, the Ducks' scouting staff draft on where the prospects "could be in the future". Comtois is looking scary good and we got him in the 2nd round. I don't think Kase would ever be ranked in the top-50 prospects, but I'm so happy to have him on board - and we got him in the 7th round! Maybe after this season, our prospects who are on the outside looking in might jump into the top-50 next year or bypass it altogether b/c they played too many games to be considered a prospect any longer.

But you gotta admit, before last year started, all we had in our system of note was Terry. Next thing we know, Terry, Steel, Comtois, Lundestrom, and Sherwood are on NHL ice at the beginning of the season. Comtois had 7 points in 10 games before he fell to injury, fortunately, so he wouldn't be exposed to the future Seattle expansion draft. When Jones was called up to the NHL, he's was speeding everywhere, but couldn't score as much (tear, tear... reminders of Cogs). Add in Zegras and our system took a major jump from what it was before the season started last year. We still don't know what we have in D Guhle either. LoL

With that said, I understand why the mass media has us ranked in the middle and the Kings above us. If you weren't a Ducks fan, then you'd be wondering why are the Ducks in the middle of the pack as you might only recognize Terry "Mr. 5-hole" and Comtois (getting bashed for losing the gold for team Canada). Oh, and Zegras.

On a related note, I'm really hyped to see how Tracey does at the rookie tourney!
 

tomd

Registered User
Apr 23, 2003
9,196
4,771
Visit site
I try not to get super overhyped about our prospects but it sure seems like for whatever reason ours are getting slept on. Our forward prospects have to be near the top right?? Also shouldn't recent development history matter? How the **** do the king's keep getting ranked ahead? They've developed almost nothing in 5-7 years!!

Until they start giving out a large silver trophy based upon prospect rankings, I wouldn't worry too much about where teams get ranked. Most of the time the only value of these rankings is to look back in 3-5 years and laugh at them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalv

cheesymc

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
3,728
1,521
Irvine
Visit site
Seems like Perbix added 10 lbs and Lacombe aka Beevis also is no longer 175 and now 190. Then again, I think the NCAA rounds up to the nearest 5 lbs so these guys are likely smaller.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad