Prospect Info: FLYguy3911's 2020 NHL Draft Rankings - Top 102 Skaters & Others

[Striiker]

Obligatory Askarov post because nothing matters for this franchise anymore.

Draft him
Trade Hart for a defensemen
Trade Sanheim for a forward
Trade Couturier for draft picks
Draft a sniper next year
?????
Profit

 

[Chinatown88]

Draft him
Trade Hart for a defensemen
Trade Sanheim for a forward
Trade Couturier for draft picks
Draft a sniper next year
?????
Profit

That's just Chuck.

 

[Striiker]

I want to point out an observation @FLYguy3911 made here, only because it's something I recently watched a video about and I thought it was interesting.

You’ll notice a slew of sub six foot defenseman on this list. I wouldn’t expect a team to dress six 5’10 defensemen nor do I happen to believe that is the only way to have success (quite the opposite actually), however going back to the point about betting on skill, it just so happens the smaller players tend to be the most skilled players.

Obviously this video is about basketball, but I think the general things he said still apply as far as why it is that certain sized players have certain skillets. Plus all his videos are really well made.



Basically the theory is that it's not that the short players usually end up as the most skilled players by chance. It's probably that the fact that they're short that changed the way they developed, trained, and evolved as a player so that they became as skilled as they are. So when people say "imagine if ____ was 6 inches taller" about a super skilled small player, they're not accounting for the likelihood that being 6 inches taller means that player doesn't end up as skilled as they are.

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

Nice work, @FLYguy3911. I am always impressed at those of you who spend the time to watch enough of these kids to get a handle on how they project to be as NHL players.

I almost always choose to watch the NHL over any other hockey, so it's a completely different mindset to mine and I commend you guys for doing it. Props to @IronMarshal for your summaries, too.

 

[Striiker]

Nice work, @FLYguy3911. I am always impressed at those of you who spend the time to watch enough of these kids to get a handle on how they project to be as NHL players.

I almost always choose to watch the NHL over any other hockey, so it's a completely different mindset to mine and I commend you guys for doing it. Props to @IronMarshal for your summaries, too.

Yeah, @IronMarshal did a great job as well. I don't remember if I mentioned that in the other thread, but I read it.

 

[FlyerNutter]

39. Jean-Luc Foudy Forward Windsor (OHL)

Foudy is a test case of stats vs. eye test. He failed the stats test pretty spectacularly this year. He even regressed from his 16 year old season when he led OHL rookies in assists and only trailed Perfetti, Byfield, and Perreault in total scoring. That’s typically a major red-flag. To the scouting, this is probably the best skater in the draft. He’s probably even better than his brother at the same age. He’s an effortless puck mover and gets pucks north-south in a hurry and can lap defenders in the OZ. He combines his skating with + passing instincts as a playmaker. We are talking about a pretty rare combination of skills, even if he is a bit on the extreme ends of particular parts of the game. He likely won’t offer much as a goal scorer but he should at the very least be able to push pucks in the right direction. I’m willing to bet that this year was just a one-off. He has produced everywhere prior to this season.

Warms my soul.

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

I want to point out an observation @FLYguy3911 made here, only because it's something I recently watched a video about and I thought it was interesting.



Obviously this video is about basketball, but I think the general things he said still apply as far as why it is that certain sized players have certain skillets. Plus all his videos are really well made.



Basically the theory is that it's not that the short players usually end up as the most skilled players by chance. It's probably that the fact that they're short that changed the way they developed, trained, and evolved as a player so that they became as skilled as they are. So when people say "imagine if ____ was 6 inches taller" about a super skilled small player, they're not accounting for the likelihood that being 6 inches taller means that player doesn't end up as skilled as they are.

Smaller guys usually have quicker hands/feet, which does factor into some forms of skill in some sports, for sure. When you get a guy like McDavid, Lemieux, Lindros, who have the hands of a smaller guy in hockey, you get a dominant player.

A guy like Point probably wouldn't be as skilled if he was 6 inches taller because he developed within the size he is. The guys above are somewhat freaks of nature.

Running/sprinting is a comparison like this I have talked with friends about before. There's kind of an "ideal" height for sprinters unless you're a freak, like Usain Bolt. His footspeed is actually faster than the guys he runs against, so not only is he covering more ground per step because his legs are significantly longer, he is touching the ground less frequently than his competition (which is when you "slow" down in a race). It's a double whammy for his competition and guys his size shouldn't be able to run so fast. Big guy with little guy "skill".

 

[Chinatown88]

I sure hope Foudy doesn't last until the 3rd round and specifically the pick we traded for Braun. Because I would've loved to take a flyer on him.

 

[BigToe]

I want to point out an observation @FLYguy3911 made here, only because it's something I recently watched a video about and I thought it was interesting.



Obviously this video is about basketball, but I think the general things he said still apply as far as why it is that certain sized players have certain skillets. Plus all his videos are really well made.



Basically the theory is that it's not that the short players usually end up as the most skilled players by chance. It's probably that the fact that they're short that changed the way they developed, trained, and evolved as a player so that they became as skilled as they are. So when people say "imagine if ____ was 6 inches taller" about a super skilled small player, they're not accounting for the likelihood that being 6 inches taller means that player doesn't end up as skilled as they are.

 

[FlyerNutter]

I sure hope Foudy doesn't last until the 3rd round and specifically the pick we traded for Braun. Because I would've loved to take a flyer on him.

Best skater is all I need to know.

Honestly though, thanks to @FLYguy3911 for this. Will make for some good reading when I’ve got more of a chance!

 

[Chinatown88]

 

[FLYguy3911]

You should post it on the main boards too, if you haven’t already.

I think the last time I went to the main boards I got into an argument about whether Bobby Brink was smart or not so I'll probably just keep this local, but I appreciate the words.

@FLYguy3911 how would you compare Drysdale to York? When reading your thoughts on the former I got some reminders of the latter. Is that super dumb, or just dumb?

They have some similarities. Both are obviously skilled and skilled passers who aren't really shooting threats. Drysdale does two things that I wish York did or did better. Drysdale has a clear advantage in skating and as a result his game is much more skating based. He's a more willing puck carrier and more willing to take chances with the puck. Maybe that has something to do with their environments. The OHL is a lot more wide open and invites offense and creativity. The USHL/NCAA is much more structured with less freedom for creativity. York is much more decisive with the puck. It's on his stick and off his stick and he let's his teammate finish the job. He's the ultimate complimentary player. I think York at the same age was better in the Neutral Zone and Defensive Zone. He was more consistent shift-to-shift.

Drysdale's skating edge gives him a higher ceiling and he's likely to have a bigger NHL role so I don't expect York to become a more valuable player overall or anything, but as prospects they are probably closer than the public thinks.

Nice work, @FLYguy3911. I am always impressed at those of you who spend the time to watch enough of these kids to get a handle on how they project to be as NHL players.

I almost always choose to watch the NHL over any other hockey, so it's a completely different mindset to mine and I commend you guys for doing it. Props to @IronMarshal for your summaries, too.

I have an interest in every major sport's draft. I think as a fan it's good to have a general opinion about every guy that enters the league and build from there.

I enjoy amateur hockey as a change of pace. The players obviously aren't as talented but there's less structure and the game can produce some interesting results. But yeah it can be hard after a while. I tried to watch 3 games a night during quarantine. Eventually you burn out. I haven't watched nearly enough to be considered an expert, but I tried to get some outside opinions I trust to bounce some new names and new ideas around. I also have a spreadsheet with 500+ names that splits boxscore stats into a million different directions so towards the end my analysis was more statistical and historical-based.

You quickly realize why teams have regional scouts.

I want to point out an observation @FLYguy3911 made here, only because it's something I recently watched a video about and I thought it was interesting.

Obviously this video is about basketball, but I think the general things he said still apply as far as why it is that certain sized players have certain skillets. Plus all his videos are really well made.



Basically the theory is that it's not that the short players usually end up as the most skilled players by chance. It's probably that the fact that they're short that changed the way they developed, trained, and evolved as a player so that they became as skilled as they are. So when people say "imagine if ____ was 6 inches taller" about a super skilled small player, they're not accounting for the likelihood that being 6 inches taller means that player doesn't end up as skilled as they are.

There are some advantages shorter players have that result in better coordination which results in more "skill" but yeah I think a lot of it has to do with a "natural selection" effect. Smaller players have to prove they can play at each new level and bigger plays have to prove that they cannot play at each new level. At the youth levels, they are only going to keep smaller players around if they have a clear advantage in skill. When you see a guy like Gaudreau who came from high school/prep hockey in NJ at ~5'7 130 pounds and he dominates a Junior league full of older players who are going to play D1 hockey the following year, just think about how f***ing skilled he has to be just to make it to that level. And then he produces again, again, and again until he's a top scorer in the NHL.

 

[Stizzle]

@FLYguy3911 is a true lunatic to compile all of this. Big props for the Herculean effort. I look forward to seeing who ends up being his Bulat Shaffigulan (just kidding @Magua, you're the GOAT ).

Ok, so about your boy, Bourque. What are the odds his skating can take a leap forward? Obviously, this was a hot topic last year with Brink. But Bob E. was physically immature.

Bourque looks done growing to me, and little room to add muscle. How easy is it for a kid like that to gain some explosiveness?

Bourque just looks a little sluggish. I realize his big TOI may have something to do with that. Also, I do recognize Couturier had similar "sluggish" complaints about him in his draft year with similar huge TOI issues.

 

[Here4ThaLids]

I want to point out an observation @FLYguy3911 made here, only because it's something I recently watched a video about and I thought it was interesting.



Obviously this video is about basketball, but I think the general things he said still apply as far as why it is that certain sized players have certain skillets. Plus all his videos are really well made.



Basically the theory is that it's not that the short players usually end up as the most skilled players by chance. It's probably that the fact that they're short that changed the way they developed, trained, and evolved as a player so that they became as skilled as they are. So when people say "imagine if ____ was 6 inches taller" about a super skilled small player, they're not accounting for the likelihood that being 6 inches taller means that player doesn't end up as skilled as they are.

Haven't watched the video yet but my mind immediately goes to Survivorship Bias. NBA players are already at the far, far right tail end of the population bell curve for height -- those closer to average will have necessarily been the best of their height group and freakishly skilled, and there are so many more in that group by volume. Not fully explanatory but food for thought.

 

[Here4ThaLids]

Hi,

I publicly promise you that I will at least attempt to read every word before the draft.

At first blush, looks like a great list! Very defensible, consistent, and imo pretty accurate! The re-start killed any hopes of a deep dive for me, who has looked into about 25 prospects that might be there for the Flyers and only a handful of complete games for that group.

Nothing to argue with and not really anything to quibble with -- I might move Poirier down a tier and move Robins up one, but that's about it. Love seeing Foerster where you put him -- when I watched his games I found my eyes drifting to his teammate Evan Vierling, whom I wouldn't mind taking in the third (or even late second, depending).

Phenomenal work. Thank you!

P.S. Extra fun when the Devils take Askarov at #7 .

 

[DancingPanther]

Give me Hendrix, for obvious reasons

This is excellent, now I can boisterously post user the guise of knowledge when in reality I'm just regurgitating the thoughts of others!

Thanks FluyGuy!

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

I have an interest in every major sport's draft. I think as a fan it's good to have a general opinion about every guy that enters the league and build from there.

I enjoy amateur hockey as a change of pace. The players obviously aren't as talented but there's less structure and the game can produce some interesting results. But yeah it can be hard after a while. I tried to watch 3 games a night during quarantine. Eventually you burn out. I haven't watched nearly enough to be considered an expert, but I tried to get some outside opinions I trust to bounce some new names and new ideas around. I also have a spreadsheet with 500+ names that splits boxscore stats into a million different directions so towards the end my analysis was more statistical and historical-based.

You quickly realize why teams have regional scouts.

To the bold, I used to have a similar opinion, but never had the ability to watch enough games when I was at an age where I had enough time to watch a large enough sample to have an idea across a wide swath of talent.

I would never have more than a dozen guys I was keen on coming into a draft, but something changed when I hit my late twenties where I just couldn't be bothered to care about non-NHL hockey to get enjoyment of projecting a talent to the pro level.

There are also so many options now, I don't know how anyone can watch everything. As you say, regional scouts are regional for a reason.

I basically have at least 6 hours of hockey on per night during the season and 99% is an NHL game. I throw on the occasional CHL game and watch the WJC, but that's the extent of my non-NHL watching these days. Ever since I could get every NHL game, that's all I want to watch. After the season is over, I enjoy unwinding with summer sports and rarely look back at old "tape".

Definitely would lean towards pro scout over amateur scout.

It's commendable that you guys do this for "fun". I am pulling for you guys to get hired by a team one day. @Appleyard is well on his way; one of you guys is next.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

It’s sincerely appreciated and I will read it all by draft time, but please don’t do this to yourself again next year unless you’re legitimately interested in all of these guys. Writing that many blurbs is a soul-sucking experience.

Please feel free to remind me of my hypocrisy when I’m bitching about having to watch the same Alabama games 11 times because they have so many prospects for yet another year.

Benjamin Baumgartner in the Top 100 means it’s a good list.

 

[Chinatown88]

It’s sincerely appreciated and I will read it all by draft time, but please don’t do this to yourself again next year unless you’re legitimately interested in all of these guys. Writing that many blurbs is a soul-sucking experience.

Please feel free to remind me of my hypocrisy when I’m bitching about having to watch the same Alabama games 11 times because they have so many prospects for yet another year.

Benjamin Baumgartner in the Top 100 means it’s a good list.

Roll Tide!

 

[TB87]

Whoa man. This promises to be quite intriguing. I’ll dig into this on my lunch break today

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Whoa man. This promises to be quite intriguing. I’ll dig into this on my lunch break today

Don't get too excited. He's going to need at least a year-long break, so you're up in 2021.

 

[wankstifier]

This is insane.

Thank you!

 

[FLYguy3911]

Ok, so about your boy, Bourque. What are the odds his skating can take a leap forward? Obviously, this was a hot topic last year with Brink. But Bob E. was physically immature.

Bourque looks done growing to me, and little room to add muscle. How easy is it for a kid like that to gain some explosiveness?

Bourque just looks a little sluggish. I realize his big TOI may have something to do with that. Also, I do recognize Couturier had similar "sluggish" complaints about him in his draft year with similar huge TOI issues.

He's a January '02 so there's a chance the skating doesn't come, but similar to Perfetti I think the offensive tools, as a playmaker and as a shooter, are too good for him not to become at least a middle 6 player in the NHL. And probably a center at that which this draft lacks. He's super smart too. Now he's obviously a step down from Perfetti and he's unlikely to go in the top 15, but I'm always going to bet on smart, high skill guys figuring it out.

Nothing to argue with and not really anything to quibble with -- I might move Poirier down a tier and move Robins up one, but that's about it. Love seeing Foerster where you put him -- when I watched his games I found my eyes drifting to his teammate Evan Vierling, whom I wouldn't mind taking in the third (or even late second, depending).

I hear you about Poirier. I've seen him get benched because he was so poor and lazy defensively. I just think he's too damn good with the puck on his stick not to consider in the late 1st/early 2nd (not for the Flyers but just in general). Even if you have to wait 3 or 4 years, he has impact skill. I have always held the belief that you can work with defensemen on their off-puck habits, but the puck skills and offensive instincts are what they are. I spent way too much time in the past arguing against Travis Sanheim's off-puck issues in Junior only to watch him get more PK time than PP time in the NHL to give up on this player type. Poirier is the ultimate boom-or-bust player in the draft. His range of outcomes is vast.

I hedged on Robins. I like him enough to rank him above Zary and I believe he's closer to the second half player than the first half player, but being that he's one of the older players in the draft I didn't feel confident moving him into the 20s without the extensive track record. Excellent offensively, but I'm not sure how much two-way impact he's going to have. He's a late '01 so you have to be 100% convinced he's a professional this time next year. He's an ideal 2nd round candidate for the Flyers.

Roll Tide!

No.

 

[Adtar02]

who's winning the poll

 

[Flyerfan13]

Amazing job @FLYguy3911 Greatly appreciate this you rock