HF Spring 2007 Organizational rankings (1-15)

[LAKings88]

as a kings fan i'm more concerned with being the 3rd worst NHL team then having the best prospect pool.

 

[mooseOAK*]

as a kings fan i'm more concerned with being the 3rd worst NHL team then having the best prospect pool.

When fans of my team say that the path to success is paved by trading away the best players for picks and prospects I say, careful what you wish for.

 

[MrMastodonFarm*]

Anyone have a link where I can read old Organizational Rankings?

 

[King'sPawn]

When Chicago picks Kane, do they vault over Montreal and/or LA?

My guess is no with LA. Part of the reason LA is at the top is because they have a top prospect in each position, and they'll be adding whoever is #4 overall to this list.

People need to relax about the Habs being at #2. The top 5 teams are arguably interchangeable. It might have been a little bit of bias that put Montreal at 2, but who cares if it only moved them up a spot or two?

Absolutely, and it IS all subjective. The only reason I'm glad the Kings are ranked #1 is because of how agonizing it has been to see how they rank objectively in terms of on-ice standings. This has been the only reassurance that there's some semblance of hope for the future.

 

[Maitz]

I would put montreal #6-7 and #2 is really too high but I have to admit that we really have 2-3 top end talent , Price is really dominant in AHL actually something like 2.23 and .922% dont sure about this , and he is 19 years old . Grabovski really have upside like Datsyuk , man this guy is everywhere on the ice , he played 2 games with the Habs and he skates so fast and dekes so well , really was impressed . And A.Kostitsyn really got 1st line talent , amazing shot , good bodycheck and great playmaking skills , at the end of the year he had a 7 games pts streak or something like that . You can say what you want but these 3 guys wont change my mind about their potential .

 

[Abyss]

I'm surprised Columbus is that high, looking over their prospects I don't see why they are top 10?

 

[Checker*]

Would any Blues fan, Caps fan or Hawks fan actually trade their prospect pool for Montreal's?

Didn't think so

 

[Bronson]

Minnesota is a bit of stretch in the top 10...Our forward corps don't look good, we have no defensive depth whatsoever and the less said about our goaltending depth, the better. Now in the NHL, that's different.

Do you ever do anything else then whine about how thin Minnesota is on prospects? I agree that it might be a stretch to have them in the top ten, but players like Sheppard, Irmen and Madsen are all very promising, add Clutterbuck, Fiala and Pouliot and you can't say that the forward corps don't look good.

 

[RandV]

Not that I mean to complain, but are the Rangers at #7 a little high? Just looking at their writeup, they sound very similar to the Canucks, ranked far below at #21.

Goaltending:
Montoya vs Schneider
Montoya was drafted 6th overall in the 2004 draft, Schneider 26th. The #1 American goalie prospect vs the #2. Both are stuck behind elite NHL goalies on their teams, and need a trade. Montoya has an edge of course, but not enough that its a sure thing he'll be the better goalie in the long run. Just as long as Schneider signs that contract and goes pro.

Defense:
Staal, Sanguenti, Girardi, Pock vs Bourdon, Edler, Koltsov, Rahimi
Staal's a safer bet right now, but Bourdon was drafted 2 spots ahead, he could be just as valuable as Staal, though in a different sort of role. But to balance it out the next 3 are easily better on the Canucks side. It might actually be better to compare Edler to Staal, and Bouron to Sanguenti.

Offense:
Burret, Dawes, Immonen, Dubinsky vs Grabner, Raymond, Hansen, Simek
Some second tier offensive prospects, nothing spectacular.

Now I'm not the sort that complains, but like I said the two teams match up well, sort of like the Rangers being a 1A with the Canucks a 1B. Should they really be 14 spots higher?

 

[xander]

Might I offer the (biased) ranger responce? Please take my opinions with an apropriately sized grain of salt. Personally, I do think the rangers are ranked a bit too high (I'd have them around 8-10), but I'd take their prospect pool well before I'd take Vancouver's (no offense is ment here, Vancouver may well deserve to be higher than they are.)

Not that I mean to complain, but are the Rangers at #7 a little high? Just looking at their writeup, they sound very similar to the Canucks, ranked far below at #21.

Goaltending:
Montoya vs Schneider
Montoya was drafted 6th overall in the 2004 draft, Schneider 26th. The #1 American goalie prospect vs the #2. Both are stuck behind elite NHL goalies on their teams, and need a trade.

This is irrelevant to their rankings.

Montoya has an edge of course, but not enough that its a sure thing he'll be the better goalie in the long run. Just as long as Schneider signs that contract and goes pro.

Of course it's not a sure thing, there are no sure things when it comes to prospects, but as of now Montoya has put in two very good years in the AHL while Schneider has yet to play pro hockey (I realize that this is his choice, but the point still stands.) Alot of good hockey people will tell you that the biggest step in prospect development isn't AHL to NHL but amateur to pro. Montoya has already made that step with flying colors, right now he's alot more valuable.

Defense:
Staal, Sanguenti, Girardi, Pock vs Bourdon, Edler, Koltsov, Rahimi
Staal's a safer bet right now, but Bourdon was drafted 2 spots ahead, he could be just as valuable as Staal, though in a different sort of role. But to balance it out the next 3 are easily better on the Canucks side. It might actually be better to compare Edler to Staal, and Bourdon to Sanguenti.

The consesnsus is that Staal is one of the top 3 defensive prospects in the world right now. His post draft resume is just impecable, while Bourdon has been suspect at times (though I realize that it's hard to judge his performance this year, on account of him being passed around like a drunk freshman at a frat party.) This doesn't meen that Bourdon won't end up the better player, it's possible, but right now Staal has just done alot more.

You can kick Pock out of that mix, he probably doesn't fiqure heavily in the future of the Ranger defense corps. Replace him with Sauer, who is a much better prospect.

I'll give you Edler over Sanguinetti or Sauer, for now, but Girardi is already a steady NHL defensemen (as evidenced by the amount of icetime he was trusted with in the layoffs), Koltsov and Rahimi are not, and we have no idea how Koltsov's game will translate to the NHL.

so:
Staal(the best prospect in either organization)>Bourdon
Sanguinetti<Edler
Girardi>Koltsov (I'm sorry, I need to actually see somthing out of Koltsov on north american ice)
Sauer Vs. Rahimi? I honestly don't know enough about Rahimi to comment on him. Sauer has been exceptional as a shutdown defensemen in the WHL over the last two years, he's a real nice prospect.

Ivan Baranka is also a nice defensive prospect that should be considered.

Offense:
Bourret, Dawes, Immonen, Dubinsky vs Grabner, Raymond, Hansen, Simek
Some second tier offensive prospects, nothing spectacular.

Now I'm not the sort that complains, but like I said the two teams match up well, sort of like the Rangers being a 1A with the Canucks a 1B. Should they really be 14 spots higher?

1. Immonen is not a top 5 prospect, or really of any consideration at all, he's done. Replace him With Callahan, whose abilities where well shocased in the post season.
2. While these guys are probably nothing more than second line talents, it should be noted that you could replace a few of those names with Anisimov, Dupont, Korpikoski, or Pyatt and you would still have a nice selection of second line talents. The Rangers may have only second/third line foward talents, but they've got about 8 legitimate ones (more if you want to include grinders.) Some will bust, but the more bullets you have, the better chance you have of hitting.

I will admit that Grabner probably has the highest potential out of the entire group.

Overall I just think that the Ranger's system is deeper and more comprehensive. On top of that, they have the best player in either group (Staal.)

 

[LAKings88]

When fans of my team say that the path to success is paved by trading away the best players for picks and prospects I say, careful what you wish for.

i'm not advocating trading prospects away(it isn't always the end of the world to do so though)...and a good prospect cupboard goes a long way to staying competitive, but for most of these teams all that really matters is the top 3 or 5 prospects that might contribute down the road...who really cares about possible 3rd or 4th liners. every team has their top end prospects so what difference does it make? unless you are lucky to have a toews or erik johnson then its all pretty equal when it comes down to it. i will not be overly enthusiastic about having the best rated prospect pool, i'd rather have a team that gets it done yearly like detroit even if they are not rated number one for their prospect system on a talk board.

 

[WADEugottaBELAKthat]

Phoenix should be top 5, imho

 

[kingpest19]

"Jack Johnson (D), Patrick O'Sullivan (LW), Jonathan Bernier (G), Brian Boyle (C), Lauri Tukonen (RW)"

all of em will be with the Kings next year ....u can argue Bernier wont but non-the-less these guys are top prospects and too see em with Kopitar, Brown and Cammalleri in years to come .... if only we can get Drury and Hannan in the off season and draft the "Siberian Express" Alexei Cherepanov with the 4th pick

Boyle and Tukonen will most likely spend the majority of the season in Manchester unless they come to camp and blow everyone away. Tukonen still needs to find his consistency and stay away from the injury bug. Boyle is going to need part of the season to get fully accustomed to the pro level. And thats not a bad thing. Good to have this deep of a prospect pool just sucks to have to watch crappy play to get it.

 

[MrMastodonFarm*]

Edmonton continues tohave a decent stable of prospects like they did back in 2003/2004, with JDD, Mikonov, Niinimaki, Woywitka, Lynch, Rita, etc etc, but haven't shown that they can develop worth crap... I think it's time these rankings start to give the benefit of the doubt to teams like the Devils and Stars who have been producing players lately, instead of overrating Edmonton.

 

[Titan124]

Why are the habs #2, I see Price, I see Kostitsyn, but after that there is nobody that good. I easily put the next 7 or 8 teams in front of them.

 

[Narnia]

Edmonton continues tohave a decent stable of prospects like they did back in 2003/2004, with JDD, Mikonov, Niinimaki, Woywitka, Lynch, Rita, etc etc, but haven't shown that they can develop worth crap... I think it's time these rankings start to give the benefit of the doubt to teams like the Devils and Stars who have been producing players lately, instead of overrating Edmonton.

I take offense to this post. The Oilers have developed players if you open your eyes from your anti-Oilers hatred. Players the Oilers have developed are Hemsky, Stoll, Smid, Horcoff, Torres, Pisani and there's probably more. I'm sick of reading crap like this.

 

[Nich]

i'm not advocating trading prospects away(it isn't always the end of the world to do so though)...and a good prospect cupboard goes a long way to staying competitive, but for most of these teams all that really matters is the top 3 or 5 prospects that might contribute down the road...who really cares about possible 3rd or 4th liners. every team has their top end prospects so what difference does it make? unless you are lucky to have a toews or erik johnson then its all pretty equal when it comes down to it. i will not be overly enthusiastic about having the best rated prospect pool, i'd rather have a team that gets it done yearly like detroit even if they are not rated number one for their prospect system on a talk board.

eh i disagree on many levels.

 

[Garo]

Why are the habs #2, I see Price, I see Kostitsyn, but after that there is nobody that good. I easily put the next 7 or 8 teams in front of them.

You are right in a way, but my explanation to that would be that a guy like D'Agostini, ranked 15th, isn't that far of the 4th ranked Chipchura.

And someone suggests that previous success should count on those lists, well it would also explain our ranking, add to that a very solid farm team for some time (outside of last year).

Two is definitely surprising though, and probably a stretch.

 

[Ape Clutch]

it is not a stretch, habs fan stop being apologetic because we were rated where we should be

Two potential top 10 goalers and Danis its disgusting and a sh8 load of depth can do that.

Someone's going to reply that im biased, forgetting that they themselves are biased too...everyone is... d.e.a.l. with it, if u can't snap give up man life is harder than that...




Disclaimer: These comments are not representative of what "Kanye West" the poster thinks. Also Any comments regarding music as a rebuttle to this posters arguments will be viewed as pretty pathetic.

 

[Boston]

Toivonen hasn't really shown anyone much of being a good #1 goalie in the league. He lost his job to friggin' Tim Thomas. Rask is a great young goalie, but there is a reason why Price was chosen 5th and Rask chosen 21st, because Carey has more potential. Not that Boston's goalies are crappy, but I think Price/Halak > Rask/Toivonen.

Anyways, we're not just talking goalies, we're talking all prospects. I think the two great young goalies Montreal helped propelled them to #2 on the list. And it's logical because most people would still choose the #1 goalie to have on their team rather than, say, a #1 centre. Goalies alone can win games for you. A centre alone cannot.

I don't think that Hannu will ever be better than an average #1 in this league, but you make it sound like Price is way better than Rask. There is a reason why Stephan Quintal was picked over Joe Sakic too.

 

[Jeffrey]

I don't think that Hannu will ever be better than an average #1 in this league, but you make it sound like Price is way better than Rask. There is a reason why Stephan Quintal was picked over Joe Sakic too.

yes but his point was that price was highly ranked before the draft and he was drafted way before Rash. Also he's proving he's a top end goalie prospect in the best level before the NHL while Rask hasnt played here but IMO it would be hard for Rask to match Price early record in the AHL.

and for the no-reason factor but still intesresting, Price is bigger and younger by 5 months than Rask so if we go by the HFboards Gospel he win easily !

 

[LAKings88]

eh i disagree on many levels.

it doesn't bother me that you disagree but give me some reasons as to why. all i'm saying is that although it is nice to have a bright future as an organization, many prospects do not pan out or do not blossom until a few years down the road. being #1 one on this board or any other doesn't equate to future success...shows some hope maybe...but unless your team has some blue chip prospects ready to play, these rankings really don't mean all that much.

 

[Martyros]

while the kings have all 30 picks in the 4th round of the 07' draft.......

 

[Boston]

yes but his point was that price was highly ranked before the draft and he was drafted way before Rash. Also he's proving he's a top end goalie prospect in the best level before the NHL while Rask hasnt played here but IMO it would be hard for Rask to match Price early record in the AHL.

and for the no-reason factor but still intesresting, Price is bigger and younger by 5 months than Rask so if we go by the HFboards Gospel he win easily !

We all know the Rask/Price comparison has been debated and will still be debated until they both retire, but some people make it sound like it isn't close. You just have to be plain stupid to think that.

 

[Mr. Hab]

MY thoughts have absoutely nothing to do with Toronto. I know they dont have a great prospect base. But theres no way Montreal is #2.

Fair enough (I can't be upset with your opinion, because...it's an opinion, and it's yours). You and I (our opinions) will not change anything with rankings, prospect values, who gets better next year, etc, etc... BUT, it's still fun to discuss hockey, prospects...it would also be a bit boring if we all agreed with each other (all the time!!).

I had this feeling (I'm probably wrong) that you were a Leafs fan who was just simply bitter VS the HABS, that's all. ('cause you weren't upset about any other team climbing UP the rankings, just upset about Montreal). There are even lots of HAB fans who are complaining that the HABS are ranked too high

And, HABS at #2...there is no accurate way of pin-pointing which team should be where, but some teams have obvious good gems in their system...and (IMO) Montreal deserves to be in the TOP 5 (for sure). Lots of quality/quantity depth...

If I tried my best to be a non-Hab fan (no bias whatsoever) for a minute, I'd take a look at all the prospects that Montreal has, and I guarantee you that I'd salivate at the idea of having all of those prospects on my team (other team!: hypothetical).

Same goes for Chicago: Jonathan Toews (huuuuge fan), upcoming First Overall Draft Pick (Kane?), Cam Barker, Jack Skille, Dave Bolland...
I'd take the Chicago prospects anyday (in fact I think Chicago should probably be #1 overall...this is OF COURSE excluding L.A.'s Kopitar since he graduated).

To be honest, I thought Montreal would be #5 (maybe #4), but when I compare HABS' prospects with other teams' prospects, I feel that Montreal has a right to be TOP 3 (and if you put Montreal at #5 overall, I'll still feel very excited about HABS prospects). #2...#4...#5: it's all very good!

Cheers!