Prospect Info: HFCBJ 2023 Summer Prospect Rankings: #3

[tunnelvision]

I don’t mind picking Voronkov over dumais. Hell I did it on my own list. But Voronkov over brindley and Svozil is a bit…questionable. To me

I have Voronkov at #4, behind Svozil and ahead of Brindley. Voronkov's upside may be only 3C but I can imagine a situation where he plays on the second line as center/wing while bringing tremendous value to the team. Based on KHL games he's a strong board player and net front guy, can be used on special teams, can take faceoffs, is an intimidating presence and is capable of protecting teammates. Skating and goal scoring skills seem to be limited but after seeing what a player like Jenner has done in his role with the Jackets I don't see why Voronkov couldn't have nearly similar impact.

If Svozil and Mateychuk hit their ceiling they will be more valuable NHL players for sure but both have work to do and it's not certain they will get where they need to be. Brindley is a 5'9 bulldog type forward who can maybe play on the 2nd line wing in the future if he develops ideally and can somehow avoid injuries but what are the odds for that? Besides, so far I've failed to see high-end offensive tools in him, if I start to notice more of them next year then I'll probably rank him higher.

Voronkov could also bust while others would become impactful NHLers, and I wouldn't be shocked. Just like (almost) anybody else here, I've underrated and overrated many of our prospects over the years so I can only expect I'll be proven "dead wrong" in hindsight, at least on one player of this year's rankings. What I don't get is why would someone feel genuinely perplexed about a small part of the fanbase disagreeing with your opinion on these matters.

 

[Viqsi]

What I don't get is why would someone feel genuinely perplexed about a small part of the fanbase disagreeing with your opinion on these matters.

The only reason I ever find it perplexing nowadays is because after all these years one would imagine they'd have finally learned that the only way to vote incorrectly in these polls is to disagree with me.

 

[Cowumbus]

What I don't get is why would someone feel genuinely perplexed about a small part of the fanbase disagreeing with your opinion on these matters.

People are voting with the logic that Isaac Phillips is a better prospect than Oliver Moore.

A 23 year old 4th round pick who’s best season involved scoring at the same rate as an age 19 Chinakhov in the KHL is voted as a better prospect than 18 year olds taken in the 1/2nd rounds, because he’s closer to the NHL? What?

 

[Viqsi]

People are voting with the logic that Isaac Phillips is a better prospect than Oliver Moore.

A 23 year old 4th round pick who’s best season involved scoring at the same rate as an age 19 Chinakhov in the KHL is voted as a better prospect than 18 year olds taken in the 1/2nd rounds, because he’s closer to the NHL? What?

That's, again, a weighting thing. One could fairly argue that a player who makes it to the NHL is significantly more valuable than a player that never makes it, so they put a lot more emphasis on high or reliable floor rather than ceiling. It's a valid perspective, though one I disagree with (I think it reflects a little too much black-and-white in one's thinking to use that approach).

 

[Doggy]

How tf is Voronkov getting votes for 3rd best prospect….

I wanna answer this question. Because some people value a third line center who disrupts the game, wins face-offs, has the ability to add a little scoring while playing the game physically. I am such a person.

You cannot have steam fun of small high skilled players. Every successful team has players like Dima and TBH, we don't have anyone else on the the roster or in the system who has his size and plays the game the way he does. I am excited to see what he might accomplish in a CBJ sweater.

 

[majormajor]

I wanna answer this question. Because some people value a third line center who disrupts the game, wins face-offs, has the ability to add a little scoring while playing the game physically. I am such a person.

You cannot have steam fun of small high skilled players. Every successful team has players like Dima and TBH, we don't have anyone else on the the roster or in the system who has his size and plays the game the way he does. I am excited to see what he might accomplish in a CBJ sweater.

I think if Voronkov is that impact third liner, then I'd certainly support having him high up the list. That would be a very valuable player. There's still some uncertainty about what his level is going to be. Some KHL watchers say he's going to be a 4th liner or inconsistent scorer more like Klim Kostin or Toropchenko. I don't know and I don't think we have a way of knowing until we see him make the jump. The leagues are so different.

 

[Nanabijou]

I didn't vote for Voronkov. And as was made clear, everyone can use their own criteria for how they vote. But, I would say the only "right" ranking would be the one that correctly predicts the list of these same players based on their overall overall careers made 15-20 years from now.

Obviously it means that nothing can be definitive now, but looking back (say a year or two after they were drafted) if there was someone who was pushing for Derek Dorsett to be voted ahead of Stefan Legein or Dalton Prout ahead of Petr Straka, well I guess they were proven right even though Dorsett/Prout were never projected to be top 6 F/top 4 D players. My point is that I can see why someone would vote for a player that they are pretty sure will be a productive third liner (say Voronkov) versus someone who is needs to make top 6 to have a decent NHL career and that path is unclear (say Dumais).

Again, I personally don't have Voronkov ahead of Dumais, just saying I can understand those who do.

 

[Doggy]

...Voronkov...there's still some uncertainty about what his level is going to be.

There is uncertainty about all these prospects and what their level is going to be. I guess I have more faith in what Dima will be considering he's been playing and making an impact in the second best league in the world for several years compared to guys like Dumais and Malatesta who haven't played against kids older than 20 yet in their careers.

 

[stevo61]

There is uncertainty about all these prospects and what their level is going to be. I guess I have more faith in what Dima will be considering he's been playing and making an impact in the second best league in the world for several years compared to guys like Dumais and Malatesta who haven't played against kids older than 20 yet in their careers.

The league that has many failed NHLers among the scoring leaders? Good but different league. Also what does it matter if kids havent played against men? Bedard hasnt and I think he'll be fine

 

[Doggy]

So it's OK to question the success players have in the KHL but not OK to question the success players have in Canadian Juniors? Do you have any idea how absurd that sounds?

I suspect Bedard will be OK but we are not debating Bedard vs Dima (a #1OA vs a 4th round pick), we are debating Dima vs Malatesta and Dumais. I have doubts either one of those kids are going to succeed in the NHL based on playing against other 16-20 year olds. Don't you remember Vitali Abramov? Kid lit up Canadian Juniors and now...KHL. Jonathan Drouin torched Canadian Juniors and was the #3OA pick in his draft. Have you seen his NHL career?Lighten up the NHL is far form a guarantee of success in the NHL.

I am not guaranteeing Dima is going to be an impact player in the NHL but is seems awfully disingenuous to discount the KHL without discounting Canadian Juniors, NCAAs, USHL, other Euro leagues. All raise questions about a player's ability to transition to the best league in the world.

 

[stevo61]

So it's OK to question the success players have in the KHL but not OK to question the success players have in Canadian Juniors? Do you have any idea how absurd that sounds?

I suspect Bedard will be OK but we are not debating Bedard vs Dima (a #1OA vs a 4th round pick), we are debating Dima vs Malatesta and Dumais. I have doubts either one of those kids are going to succeed in the NHL based on playing against other 16-20 year olds. Don't you remember Vitali Abramov? Kid lit up Canadian Juniors and now...KHL. Jonathan Drouin torched Canadian Juniors and was the #3OA pick in his draft. Have you seen his NHL career?Lighten up the NHL is far form a guarantee of success in the NHL.

I am not guaranteeing Dima is going to be an impact player in the NHL but is seems awfully disingenuous to discount the KHL without discounting Canadian Juniors, NCAAs, USHL, other Euro leagues. All raise questions about a player's ability to transition to the best league in the world.

You should question every league and every situation. Playing in a pro league is nice but it doesnt obviously always translate. Part of truely evaluating any prospect isnt just looking at why they could succeed it is also about where they can fail. For Dumais it can be size and at times becoming a perimiter player, for Malatesta its size and very questionable offensive upside for Voronkov its questionable upside. I dont think being good not great in the KHL tells us much but atleast he has the size and attitude to fall back on to likely atleast find a 4th line job.

I can also find just as many disappointments from the KHL or any other pro league. As CBJ fans we've seen them.

All this said none of these 3 have even gotten consideration from me yet in the prospect rankings

 

[majormajor]

There is uncertainty about all these prospects and what their level is going to be. I guess I have more faith in what Dima will be considering he's been playing and making an impact in the second best league in the world for several years compared to guys like Dumais and Malatesta who haven't played against kids older than 20 yet in their careers.

Voronkov over Dumais and Malatesta is an easy one for me. They might miss by a lot. But Svozil over Voronkov is also an easy call for me, I think he's high upside with a similar floor.

Also what does it matter if kids havent played against men?

It obviously does for Malatesta and Dumais. The certainty level is going to be much lower with them than it is for a bigger guy coming from a men's league like the KHL.

For reference, (I know you know the story) Vitaly Abramov went from being 2 points per game in the Q to being an average AHLer to being a guy who is now outscored by Voronkov in the KHL.

*Abramov was also Scott Wheeler's favorite prospect, just like Dumais, and was the #1 prospect on our board one year.

Malatesta is admittedly a unit, but until late this year he had flat scoring since he was about 16 turning 17. Very little sign of improvement. His passing is perhaps the worst in the whole org, very little puck skill. I think his ceiling is probably 4th line, and he might not play at all.

Dumais I am still hopeful for and he might be good, but there's a pattern that most small players fall into where they are injury prone and lose their skill after repeated injuries. And it was less than encouraging when Dumais went down in the Q playoffs. Pronman at one point listed out a dozen guys - Fabbri, Tyler Johnson, Yamamoto, etc... who have faded very early with injuries. It always feels like there's a new breed of small players taking over but then when you add them up across the league, it's always a really low percentage. Something like a quarter of the top 100 or so highly regarded prospects around the league are 5'10 or under but there's only one or two per team in the league.

 

[stevo61]

Voronkov over Dumais and Malatesta is an easy one for me. They might miss by a lot. But Svozil over Voronkov is also an easy call for me, I think he's high upside with a similar floor.



It obviously does for Malatesta and Dumais. The certainty level is going to be much lower with them than it is for a bigger guy coming from a men's league like the KHL.

For reference, (I know you know the story) Vitaly Abramov went from being 2 points per game in the Q to being an average AHLer to being a guy who is now outscored by Voronkov in the KHL.

*Abramov was also Scott Wheeler's favorite prospect, just like Dumais, and was the #1 prospect on our board one year.

Malatesta is admittedly a unit, but until late this year he had flat scoring since he was about 16 turning 17. Very little sign of improvement. His passing is perhaps the worst in the whole org, very little puck skill. I think his ceiling is probably 4th line, and he might not play at all.

Dumais I am still hopeful for and he might be good, but there's a pattern that most small players fall into where they are injury prone and lose their skill after repeated injuries. And it was less than encouraging when Dumais went down in the Q playoffs. Pronman at one point listed out a dozen guys - Fabbri, Tyler Johnson, Yamamoto, etc... who have faded very early with injuries. It always feels like there's a new breed of small players taking over but then when you add them up across the league, it's always a really low percentage. Something like a quarter of the top 100 or so highly regarded prospects around the league are 5'10 or under but there's only one or two per team in the league.

I think height can still be overrated, especially on the heels of a Vegas win. At the end of the day skill and effort finds a way. Kent Johnson is 6'1" but how much different would we view him if he were 5'11"? He's tall but hes not big and clearly not relying on size and strength to play his game. Tampa had a number of forwards under 6'0" in their cup run. We also see many big players with injury concerns but with a smaller pool of shorter players I feel like it gets magnified.

I obviously want those guys and all else equal size matters but even then size without an attitude to match sometimes only goes so far.

But again as my voting shows im not crazy high on any of these guys, just in general skill and attitude usually finds a way. If Dumais and Malatesta fail it will be as much about puck skills and avoiding the dangerous area's of the ice as much as it is about their height. Brindley is a better example of a player Id give higher odds of making the league as more of an impact guy vs the other 2 small guys.

 

[majormajor]

I think height can still be overrated, especially on the heels of a Vegas win. At the end of the day skill and effort finds a way. Kent Johnson is 6'1" but how much different would we view him if he were 5'11"? He's tall but hes not big and clearly not relying on size and strength to play his game. Tampa had a number of forwards under 6'0" in their cup run. We also see many big players with injury concerns but with a smaller pool of shorter players I feel like it gets magnified.

I obviously want those guys and all else equal size matters but even then size without an attitude to match sometimes only goes so far.

But again as my voting shows im not crazy high on any of these guys, just in general skill and attitude usually finds a way. If Dumais and Malatesta fail it will be as much about puck skills and avoiding the dangerous area's of the ice as much as it is about their height. Brindley is a better example of a player Id give higher odds of making the league as more of an impact guy vs the other 2 small guys.

Don't neglect reach. It would actually be a problem for KJ if he had 2" inches less of a wingspan. Logan Cooley is a short guy with a unusually long wingspan and that's why he doesn't fit that short king category for me.

I'd also have Brindley ahead of Dumais, mostly on quickness.

I'm going to stop saying "Dumais and Malatesta" because they're so different, it makes for an awkward debate.

 

[stevo61]

Don't neglect reach. It would actually be a problem for KJ if he had 2" inches less of a wingspan. Logan Cooley is a short guy with a unusually long wingspan and that's why he doesn't fit that short king category for me.

I'd also have Brindley ahead of Dumais, mostly on quickness.

I'm going to stop saying "Dumais and Malatesta" because they're so different, it makes for an awkward debate.

I wonder if more shorter guys try to copy Bedard with the long stick. I think it was actually Fantilli who said Bedard's stick was damn near the length of his even though hes 4 inches shorter. Seems like it could be weird to learn with a long stick but has its positives if you do