HF's Spring 2005 Organizational Rankings 1-15

[John Flyers Fan]

I wouldn't - and definitely not when you take Pitkanen out of the equation as the writers here seemed to have done. I'd take Kari Lehtonen alone over Carter and Richards together. Once you get past that, I think Coburn, Slater, Valabik and the rest of Atlanta's prospects trump Umberger, Ruzicka, Seidenberg, and the rest of Philly's. If you include Pitkanen in the mix, then things maybe tilt back in Philly's favor.

I'm not counting Pitkanen, but Niittymaki should be counted.

Kari is certainly a better prospect than Niity, but the difference isn't monumental. The best goalie prospect in the world compared to say the 3rd-6th best. The Flyers also have far better depth in goal.

The Flyers forward prospects are in another world than Atlanta's.

The Thrashers get an edge on defense, but not near the edge the Flyers have up front.

 

[JR#9*]

I don't care, I was wrong on Vanek. He still didn't prove himself in the NHL but he is well on his way. It is't as if Parise is much behind him, Parise still has the better overall game.

What a shock!!!!

Jason "The Biggest homer on all of HF"MacIssac tries to hijack yet another thread to promote his "Parise is God" mandate!!!!!

If it weren't so pathetic it would be hysterical.

Get something new to post already.

Everybody and I mean everybody on HF knows already how you slip into your River Rats PJ's w/Parise printed on the back and pray to his poster over your bed before being tucked in at night so give it a rest already.

In all my years here the only guy who comes close in terms of homerism has been Fish on the Sand.

 

[tom_servo]

If all you're saying is that a strong prospect pool doesn't automatically equate future success, I agree with you.

That is essentially all I'm saying. He sarcastically refers to the Pens and Caps as troubled, as if they're not troubled. Existing prospect pools aside, if the worst teams in the league don't deserve the top picks in the draft, then who does? [hypothetically, in this year's case]

But I do think it is somewhat contradictory to on one hand say "we deserve the best prospect because we're the weakest team and need help to get better," but on the other hand say, "though we have the best prospects, that won't necessarily help because they're not proven players."

If I understand you correctly, you're saying it's contradictory to reappraise the value of unproven prospects as it would suit the argument. I would agree. But for the sake of argument, I don't think those two assertions are necessarily contradictory. In fact, aren't they both true?

"Weak teams deserve the best prospects, even though those prospects won't necessarily help because they're not proven players." It makes perfect sense, really. Weak teams only ask for a chance at future success, and that's what they get in the draft.

 

[DARKSIDE]

I wouldn't - and definitely not when you take Pitkanen out of the equation as the writers here seemed to have done. I'd take Kari Lehtonen alone over Carter and Richards together. Once you get past that, I think Coburn, Slater, Valabik and the rest of Atlanta's prospects trump Umberger, Ruzicka, Seidenberg, and the rest of Philly's. If you include Pitkanen in the mix, then things maybe tilt back in Philly's favor.

I believe THN had the Flyers rated in the top 3. Not sure now if they included Pitkanen as a prospect. Either way, the Flyers are in pretty good shape for the immediate future.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I believe THN had the Flyers rated in the top 3. Not sure now if they included Pitkanen as a prospect. Either way, the Flyers are in pretty good shape for the immediate future.

Under THN's methodology Pitkanen counts, becuase they go strictly on age, which IMO is the fairest way to go.

Why should a team like Carolina be "punished" in the rankings because Eric Staal doesn't count, yet the Flyers can count Carter & Richards from the same draft ?

 

[dawgbone]

I greatly prefer the Kings forward prospects to that of the Oilers. Compare Brown, Cammalleri, Tambellini, Tukonen, Lehoux, Boyle, Kanko, Pushkarev vs Schremp, Pouliot, Winchester, Jacques, McDonald, Rita, Jacques, Niinimaki. No real contest, IMO.

Valuewise, comparing the Kings top 10 to the Oilers top 10 (while matching them up as best as possible), I'd (roughly and IMO somewhat generously in a couple cases) rank them as
Brown >/>> Schremp
Cammalleri = Pouliot
Gleason >/>> Greene
Grebeshkov >/>> Woywitka
Tukonen = Dubnyk
Tambellini = Deslauriers
Lehoux = Lynch
Boyle = Winchester
Kanko = McDonald
Pushkarev = Jacques

The only real argument I see is balance, with goaltending being the Kings' Achilles heel.

A couple of those I don't agree with...

Gleason >/>> Greene. Only offensively. Defensively Greene has a lot on Gleason. I have them about even, with Gleason putting up better offensive numbers, but Greene seeing a lot more PK time, and crucial time.

Tukonen = Dubnyk. I don't see how. Dubnyk had a great season on a bad team that gave up alot of power plays. Tukonen fell behind his pace from last year (granted, the NHLers played a role in that). Goaltending is also the most important position on the ice.

Lehoux = Lynch. Lehoux projects to be a 3rd/4th liner (based on his AHL scoring). Lynch was an AHL allstar his rookie year when he was healthy, and struggled this past season with a wrist injury. Potential wise, Lynch still looks to be a #4 defencemen, which puts him ahead of Lehoux.

Pushkarev = Jacques. Jacques game is tailor-made for the NHL. Big guy who loves to hit and can skate incredibly well. Pushkarev struggled a bit as an older player in the WHL. Jacques looks to be anywhere from a 2nd liner to a 4th liner, whereas Pushkarev doesn't have that same diversity to his game. He's either got to be a top 6 player, or he won't be in the NHL at all. Jacques gets the nod.

So in the end, it's closer to:

Brown >/>> Schremp
Cammalleri = Pouliot
Gleason = Greene
Grebeshkov >/>> Woywitka
Tukonen </<< Dubnyk
Tambellini = Deslauriers
Lehoux < Lynch
Boyle = Winchester
Kanko = McDonald
Pushkarev </<< Jacques

The Oilers have a little bit more balance throughout, plus the goaltending edge, which is the most important position on the ice.

 

[tom_servo]

Under THN's methodology Pitkanen counts, becuase they go strictly on age, which IMO is the fairest way to go.

Why should a team like Carolina be "punished" in the rankings because Eric Staal doesn't count, yet the Flyers can count Carter & Richards from the same draft ?

I agree with this. However, in HF's defense, they don't claim to create comprehensive outlooks with their lists. They're more or less just a guide to who's not already in the league.

I wouldn't mind seeing HF take the THN approach, though, because ranking strictly unproven talent pools tends to skew the overall potential of a given franchise.

 

[Safir*]

The Flyers also have far better depth in goal.

Lehtonen, Garnett, Berhoel & Turple vs. Nitty, Tremblay, Houle & Beauchemin

Far better depth? I don't think so JFF, after Lehts the Thrashers have a nice line of goaltending prospects. I see Garnett as Lehts longtime backup for years to come.



I agree with you on the other points.

 

[rt]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

 

[Dave is a killer]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

no, but if you add Pitkanen and remove Ruzicka than a big hell yeah ... but that's just me

 

[Diaboli]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

Can't really talk for the rest, but for me this is a fairly easy decision in Philly's favour.

 

[417]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

Well when you take what Carter and Richards are doing right now, yes, not to mention Niittymaki...Flyers keep doing it no matter what...

However, Perezhogin ain't no slouch (please save me the torture of having to read some lame joke about swinging sticks or some stupid baseball analogy) he's been playing great in the RSL, and had a great year in the AHL as well, he's played with the Russian Senior team on several occasions, and would of most likely have made the team for the world championships had it not been for an injury...

IMO, there's few teams that could rival the Habs in terms of the number of quality forward prospects, Flyers are one of those teams though, they're a team that's top heavy at forward, but might have even more question marks on defense than Montreal...

 

[417]

Can't really talk for the rest, but for me this is a fairly easy decision in Philly's favour.

Wow...I suggest Habs fans stay away from this thread...seems like habs at #4 is a huge travesty around here...

Can't say i'm surprised by the reaction around here...

I agree that the Flyers should be higher on this list, but why is it everyone has to say that they'd rather have the Flyers prospects instead of the Habs one...why not the Preds, Oilers, Hawks for example

 

[Barnaby]

Wow...I suggest Habs fans stay away from this thread...seems like habs at #4 is a huge travesty around here...

Can't say i'm surprised by the reaction around here...

I agree that the Flyers should be higher on this list, but why is it everyone has to say that they'd rather have the Flyers prospects instead of the Habs one...why not the Preds, Oilers, Hawks for example

I'll take Philly prospects over Montreal

 

[MS]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

In a heartbeat.

 

[417]

Yeah...there's absolutely no bias on this board

 

[Saku K]

Yeah...there's absolutely no bias on this board

When I see you say things like this:

While alot of teams might have that big homerun hitter type of player like Vanek, Ovechkin, Zherdev...the rest of their forwards fall into the, Milroy, Locke and Ferland categories....

I'm starting to wonder if you just lack knowledge or if you're taking your defend-and-excuse-habs-prospect-at-all-cost attitude too far.

Seriously, do you consider Derek Roy, Alexandre Picard Jason Pominville, Alexander Semin, Eric Ferh, Drew Stafford, Daniel Paille, Dan Fritsche into the ''Milroy. Locke, Ferland'' categorie? If so, I now understand why you think everybody's (including me) biaised against the mighty habs forward prospects.

Oh and BTW, I also think the habs are too high on the list and Philly's top 5 can definitely be put in the same class as the Habs' top 5 IMO.

 

[Diaboli]

Yeah...there's absolutely no bias on this board

I'm a Habs fan; I'm not allowed to pick other than Hab-prospects then, am I?

Again, I'd take those 5 Phillies rather easily. I also stated that it was merely my opinion, so what's wrong?

 

[SmokeyClause]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

If I had a choice, it'd definitely be Philly's bunch. No bias here either. Not a big fan of either team

 

[417]

When I see you say things like this:



I'm starting to wonder if you just lack knowledge or if you're taking your defend-and-excuse-habs-prospect-at-all-cost attitude too far.

Seriously, do you consider Derek Roy, Alexandre Picard Jason Pominville, Alexander Semin, Eric Ferh, Drew Stafford, Daniel Paille, Dan Fritsche into the ''Milroy. Locke, Ferland'' categorie? If so, I now understand why you think everybody's (including me) biaised against the mighty habs forward prospects.

Oh and BTW, I also think the habs are too high on the list and Philly's top 5 can definitely be put in the same class as the Habs' top 5 quality-wise.

Ok...I was exagerrating...I didin't really mean that, I realize all those players you listed are all solid and there's much more...

It's just that if you go over this thread, everyone is up in arms about the Habs being at #4, and then everyone says they'd rather have Philly's group than the Habs one...

I agree with you, I do think the Habs are too high on this list, but there are other teams who are too low or too high on this list as well, but if you go over this thread, it's about the Habs being too high

How come no one said that they'd rather have Philly's group of prospects instead of Chicago's, or the Rangers, Oilers, Kings.etc...why is it the Habs are always singled out...you can say what you want about me, yes I do like to defend the habs, it's my team, it's just that I find it ridiculous that in this thread almost 70% of the comments are saying that the Habs are too high, that's what leads me to say that this board is biased...

The way the comments are going around here, you'd think the Habs deserve to be in the 16-30 range

 

[417]

I'm a Habs fan; I'm not allowed to pick other than Hab-prospects then, am I?

Again, I'd take those 5 Phillies rather easily. I also stated that it was merely my opinion, so what's wrong?

Why do you feel as though I was referring to you personally, I didn't quote any of your post....

I never said there was anything wrong with you picking the Flyers prospects over the Habs...so... what's is wrong with you?

For those of you that think i'm just being a huge homer, again, I also think that the habs are too high, but IMO, so are Chicago, the Oilers and Rangers...why isin't there any discussion about that?

 

[turnbuckle*]

Wouldn't most people prefer Carter, Richards, Niittymaki, Umberger, and Ruzicka to Perezhogin, Kostsitsyn, Danis, Higgins and Chipchura? I don't know enough about any of them, but I thought that was the consensus around here.

Perhaps most would, but keep in mind that the rankings are not only based on the top five prospects. When you add Hossa, Plekanec and Grabovsky to that list, there is forward depth that few teams can match. Is the Flyers' fifth or sixth ranked forward as good as Plekanec?

I had to laugh at the poster who said he would take Carter and Richards over all of Montreal's prospects - let's be realistic. Higgins alone is not far from Richards in terms of NHL ability - they are similar players in many ways. Carter will more than likely be a better NHLer than Kostitsyn or Perezhogin, but there are no guarantees that he will be appreciably better. I could see Perezhogin being a 65-point scorer with a solid two-way game and Carter being a 85-point scorer. Kostitsyn has the skills to be a 70-75 point scorer, but that remains to be seen.

 

[417]

Perhaps most would, but keep in mind that the rankings are not only based on the top five prospects. When you add Hossa, Plekanec and Grabovsky to that list, there is forward depth that few teams can match. Is the Flyers' fifth or sixth ranked forward as good as Plekanec?

I had to laugh at the poster who said he would take Carter and Richards over all of Montreal's prospects - let's be realistic. Higgins alone is not far from Richards in terms of NHL ability - they are similar players in many ways. Carter will more than likely be a better NHLer than Kostitsyn or Perezhogin, but there are no guarantees that he will be appreciably better. I could see Perezhogin being a 65-point scorer with a solid two-way game and Carter being a 85-point scorer. Kostitsyn has the skills to be a 70-75 point scorer, but that remains to be seen.

That's all i'm saying...good post...everyone is up in arms about the Habs being at #4, as though there aren't any other surprises...but if you look at their forwards, they're maybe not one blue chip prospect, but they have a handful of prospect who project to be top 6 forwards, and I think that's what gives them such a high ranking, it's not as unreasonable as everyone thinks...

There are much more glaring oversight on this list for everyone to be focusing on the Habs at #4, after all, they were #5 last year, they could of gone down a few spots I agree, but going up 1 isin't the end of the world

For a team that for a decade wasn't very good, but didin't quite suck, Montreal has a stable of good, solid prospects...rememeber, Habs highest pick was #7 when they drafted Komisarek, for them to be among the top 10 is something in itself...Montreal IMO, is in the same group, in terms of prospects as Nashville and Philly....

 

[SmokeyClause]

For those of you that think i'm just being a huge homer, again, I also think that the habs are too high, but IMO, so are Chicago, the Oilers and Rangers...why isin't there any discussion about that?

There is talk about those teams. I know for a fact that Chicago's high ranking has been discussed on the Preds board. I think one of the things that draws the ire of many fans on here is that Montreal is consistently at or near the top of these things. With pretty much the same prospect core that they have now (minus 2004 draft additions), the Habs were ranked number one a little over a year ago. If this was the first time or two that people thought they were overrated, then it wouldn't be as big a deal. But as long as I can remember, I thought the Habs were a tad high. Now, I think they are still top ten. But I just don't feel they are top 5.

 

[417]

There is talk about those teams. I know for a fact that Chicago's high ranking has been discussed on the Preds board. I think one of the things that draws the ire of many fans on here is that Montreal is consistently at or near the top of these things. With pretty much the same prospect core that they have now (minus 2004 draft additions), the Habs were ranked number one a little over a year ago. If this was the first time or two that people thought they were overrated, then it wouldn't be as big a deal. But as long as I can remember, I thought the Habs were a tad high. Now, I think they are still top ten. But I just don't feel they are top 5.

I understand that, it draws the ire of many fans here, mostly because Habs just aren't liked too much around here and also because like you've mentionned, they've been among the top 5 for the last couple of years...but still, it's ridiculous, I understand that on the Preds board, people are talking about the Chicago's high ranking, but they're aren't doing it on the puclic board, on the public board, you really see how bad it is, it's like 1 in every 3 poster thinks were too high...anyways, that doesn't matter....

I personally wouldn't put the Habs any lower than 8th, and as I've mentionned, the Habs haven't picked in the top 5 since the 80's...so I think they're receiving way too much flak here, while a team like the Flyers, who apart from Pitkanen, haven't picked in the top 5 either (or at least I think so) get all the props, what gives

It's not as though the Habs at 4th is a huge mistake, it's not as though they were ranked in the 20's the last time this was done, I mean they moved up 1 spot, and it's like armegeddon here

As I finish typing this, there's a Oilers vs. Kings debate going on, so that good