Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by henrik0080, Jan 3, 2006.
When will we get an update list for top 50 prospects on HF?
A committee is working on it right now. The finished version is expected late January/early February.
Better HAVE RASK OR POGGEMON in it
start crossing the fingers fast!
Bourdon should crack the top 20 or 30. Not a chance for Kesler.
I find it funny (I realize it is still very early on) that we were having Richards vs. Kesler debates earlier this year.
c'mon they deserve to be in it
I'm pretty sure between all the different legions of fans here on HFBoards, there are about 150 players who "BETTER BE ON IT "
Just to go along with KF here, many many past players have deserved to be on it, and still havent made an apperance
The Canucks were also considered cup contenders by some people earlier in the year
Yes, but us Leaf fans can be very persuasive see.. wouldn't want to be sleeping with the fishies over a silly little list
I'm not on the committee, but I assure you I will shed a tear and play a violin for every single prospect who "should" be on the list and isn't.
With graduations, there will be a lot of new faces this year. It will be an interesting Top 50.
I am guessing Malkin will be on it even though he almost assuredly will be on the Pen's roster next year. And no, I will give no 'he BETTER be number one' speach. If not will not change who he is or how excited I am to see him next year. Thugh I would expect him to be first on the list with the banner' best not in NHL' attached to his name pretty much everywhere.
no way, that label is *obviously* reserved for Ville Mantymaa
Well for the Sens I don't think there aren't any sure bets other than Meszaros, who I can only help but imagine would now be in the mid-high range. But I could see 4 prospects all realistically appearing from Ottawa in Meszaros, Emery, and 2 of Kaigorodov, Lee and Eaves. It'll be interesting to see where Meszaros (last time 42nd) will rank as this time after what has thus far has been a very strong rookie season for him. Barker, taken 3rd that same year, was 11th for comparison.
Hopefully Emery can make his way on too somewhere more towards the end of the list with all the graduates. He's been very solid in his backup roll. His stats are pretty poor now though after that 8-3 massacre suffered to Atlanta yesterday. Sadly, I can only blame one of those goals on the netminding. Awful performance from Ottawa.
Eaves has been strong for Ottawa too, on pace for 21 goals. I don't know whether he'll place or not but I'd imagine he'll at least get a bit of consideration. Maybe Bochenski aswell, but he's been on and off and I wouldn't bet on him mkaing the list at all.
Like Emery, hopefully Lee and Kaigorodov can make their way on to the list with all the recent graduates, though probably towards the bottom of the rankings. Kaigs has cooled off after an MVP like season last year however.
I'm too lazy to check the guidelines, but wouldn't Mez/Emery be considered graduated and therefore not qualify for the new top 50?
I just want to thank the committee ahead of time for doing this. It's amazing how much work gets put into these articles that are just never appreciated enough.
With that said, Kopitar better be in it Just kidding.
Thats what I was thinking.
nice tactic, butter up the committee and hope for the best.
too bad, like all major projects at HF, the committee has all been flown to a top secret location in Sioux Lookout, Ontario where they will not have any outside influence, except for a daily bowl of Lucky Charms. They're magically delicious.
Just ballpark, how many players off the preseason list graduated?
You know me... my life would be meaningless unless the Kings had 10 of the top 50 prospects... or Lucky Charms, because they ARE magically delicious.
I don't think so. I know the age is 24, and they are 20 and 23 years of age respectively. Not sure on the games limit but if the rankings are out before March they should fit in. Well Rayzor definatly will as he's the backup. I think it's something like 50 - 60 GP. Thus, Vermette is still a prospect on our team page even if he's been in the NHL for a fair bit now (but he'll graduate now, freeing up another spot).
HF may take them off saying they're close enough, but if they took Vermette as eligable last time I think those two should pass. At least as eligablity goes. I'll leave the list up to the writers, but if Meszaros is snubbed there's a serious problem. Emery could justifiably go either way. Obviously, I'll be rooting for him.
They really ought to tighten up the eligibility requirements because there's noway guys like Ovechkin, Crosby, Vanek, Phaneuf, Meszaros, etc. that are clearly full-time NHLers should be eligible. Otherwise it will look stupid: a prospect list full of current NHL stars.
Everytime someone brings this up, I am forced to ask the same thing.
How would you change it?
We've changed the policy before, and we're more then willing to change it again, but it's a tightrope walk. We want to be inclusive and not ignoring players who spend time between the NHL and the minors. At the same time, we want to keep it somewhat restrictiv to not hold onto players who are NHLers or way too old to be considered prospects. It would take too much time to do "judgement calls" on each player on whether or not he is graduated. The picking of the number was important, because we figured that after the majority of a seasons worth on play, a player could be considered an NHLer.
For every guy you mentioned, there's guys like Sjostrom, Roy, Vermette, Kesler and Tyutin, all of whom saw some time in 2003-04, but probably wouldn't be fair to be classified as graduated until this year.
We're still searching for that magic number that works across the board, because that's really the only way to judge the players equally.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.
I realise it's tough because you guys do it during the middle of the season. Why not use something like projected number of games as the cutoff. So for instance, a guy like Ovechkin wouldn't count because it's clear barring injury that he's going to play 80+. Project based on the percentage of a team's games a player has participated in. So someone who has only played half of his team's games up to that point can still count as a prospect but a guy who is obviously a full-time player doesn't.
Separate names with a comma.