HF's top 20 NCAA drafted prospects

  • Thread starter Vic Rattlehead*
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

bruins4777*

Guest
Zajac should be higher,schnieder should be higher, stafford should be higher, montoya should be lower, stuart should be higher, and thats all that immediately comes to mind.
 

MrMastodonFarm*

Registered User
Jul 5, 2004
6,207
0
Jason MacIsaac said:
You wouldn't see them if there was actually an argument from the other side how Chucko will is the better prospect other then the constant moaning that MrMastodonFarm has been bringing to this thread.
Man, go back and look at the posts. You're the one doing some major leauge whining about Zajac.
 

tomerez

Registered User
Mar 16, 2003
1,025
0
Toronto, ON
Visit site
Jason MacIsaac said:
it is clear he is a better prospect then Jessiman, Howard, Greene and Nystrom.

Nothing is clear when it comes to prospects.

Secondly, not that I don't think Zajac should be higher, because I do, but your homerism needs to stop. Absolutely no flaws to his game? That's just silly.

I like Zajac and value him over several of the prospects that are ranked ahead of him, but in no way do I think he's a perfect prospect.
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
How many times have you seen him play again?


Twice live and twice on TV. Never impressed. He never has put up significant stats. And he's a Ranger, which gives him the jinx.
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,935
Halifax, NS
tomerez said:
Nothing is clear when it comes to prospects.

Secondly, not that I don't think Zajac should be higher, because I do, but your homerism needs to stop. Absolutely no flaws to his game? That's just silly.

I like Zajac and value him over several of the prospects that are ranked ahead of him, but in no way do I think he's a perfect prospect.
Well name something wrong with his game. The only I can find is that he passes when he probably should shoot but by the look of his numbers it seems to work.
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
No one said Zajac is a perfect prospect. JMac just said he doesn't have any obvious flaws.

Lets be honest, Zajac doesn't have any obvious flaws. He's got offense, speed, size, defense, and isn't soft.

Very well rounded and a lot of potential. He's performing at the college level and is the top rookie in the NCAA.
 

BrettNYR

Registered User
Mar 26, 2004
2,567
0
DownFromNJ said:
Twice live and twice on TV. Never impressed. He never has put up significant stats. And he's a Ranger, which gives him the jinx.
I know I came off as a wise-ass, but I didn't mean to. And I'm not impressed with him, either. And he is a Ranger prospect. :cry:
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,935
Halifax, NS
tomerez said:
I don't think he's physically perfect. From what I've seen he isn't the physical presence that a "flawless" player would entitle.
From what I read and listen on radio broadcast Zajac and Stafford are the only players that drive the net. That may not count as physical game but he has a few tip in goals and alot of goals created from going to the net. His physical game will come, he needs to fill out some more. 6`3 195 is still too thin.
 

tomerez

Registered User
Mar 16, 2003
1,025
0
Toronto, ON
Visit site
Jason MacIsaac said:
From what I read and listen on radio broadcast Zajac and Stafford are the only players that drive the net. That may not count as physical game but he has a few tip in goals and alot of goals created from going to the net. His physical game will come, he needs to fill out some more. 6`3 195 is still too thin.

And now that's all I was looking for, thank you for rehumanizing Zajac :)
 

bruins4777*

Guest
Jason MacIsaac said:
From what I read and listen on radio broadcast Zajac and Stafford are the only players that drive the net. That may not count as physical game but he has a few tip in goals and alot of goals created from going to the net. His physical game will come, he needs to fill out some more. 6`3 195 is still too thin.

go radio announcers! We can ALWAYS get a perfect view on a player from INTERNET RADIO.

Anyways, why isn't ben walter on the list? I thought he has like a goal a game or something?
 

johnny cool

Registered User
Feb 19, 2004
1,553
0
bruins4777 said:
Anyways, why isn't ben walter on the list? I thought he has like a goal a game or something?
pfft, that chump only has 23-8-31 in 25 games. he really stinks and that's why he didn't make the list
 

Kovy274Hart

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
1,679
0
Shaolin
www.battleofny.com
Jason MacIsaac said:
Stafford had a year and a half to show his best, Zajac is only a freshmen and I think this second half we will eally see him take off. His last 4 games have been nothing short of remarkable two way hockey. Thats while hitting 3 posts, 2 shorthanded. Potential I don't know if there are many from the 2004 draft that matches Zajac, Ovehckin and Malkin are obvious but I even think Zajac has more NHL potential then Parise. Thats saying alot.


Have you seen Zajac play? If I did, I'd give an opinion. But I haven't.

On Stafford, he was Team USA's best player. He could play in any situation and really made things happen. Was very impressed.

One thing you're ignoring is that Zajac is older than Stafford despite being a freshman.


On Chucko, I came away very impressed with him in the games I've seen. It's not all about "stats" Jason. But it's about how he plays. Chucko plays a very physical style and looks like a budding power forward. He's playing on one of the best NCAA lines this year with Irmen and Potulny. Not many schools have been able to deal with them. Chucko is a big part of it despite being a freshman.

He has high potential IMO.


Is the list debatable? Sure. Montoya has struggled this year and is said to be playing with a bad ankle. Jessiman is hurt. But people who talk him down make it sound like he didn't produce last year. He did alright. Hopefully, he bounces back with an injury.

Oh, and based on what I've seen, Irmen and Potulny should be rated in the top ten.


If Hensick was already drafted, he'd make the list as well. So would Marty Sertich.
 

IkeaMonkey*

Guest
bruins4777 said:
Zajac should be higher,schnieder should be higher, stafford should be higher, montoya should be lower, stuart should be higher, and thats all that immediately comes to mind.

I think Schneider is pretty snug where he is.I agree on most other fronts though. Especially Montoya.
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,935
Halifax, NS
Kovy274Hart said:
Have you seen Zajac play? If I did, I'd give an opinion. But I haven't.

On Stafford, he was Team USA's best player. He could play in any situation and really made things happen. Was very impressed.

One thing you're ignoring is that Zajac is older than Stafford despite being a freshman.


On Chucko, I came away very impressed with him in the games I've seen. It's not all about "stats" Jason. But it's about how he plays. Chucko plays a very physical style and looks like a budding power forward. He's playing on one of the best NCAA lines this year with Irmen and Potulny. Not many schools have been able to deal with them. Chucko is a big part of it despite being a freshman.

He has high potential IMO.


Is the list debatable? Sure. Montoya has struggled this year and is said to be playing with a bad ankle. Jessiman is hurt. But people who talk him down make it sound like he didn't produce last year. He did alright. Hopefully, he bounces back with an injury.

Oh, and based on what I've seen, Irmen and Potulny should be rated in the top ten.


If Hensick was already drafted, he'd make the list as well. So would Marty Sertich.
Yes I have seen Zajac play, only once...I don't expect to be an expert on the kid but the people I talk to on other forums are. They seen him play all year. If I were only going by stats then Zajac wouldn't seem as good as I am ranting about. His offense has actually been a little bit of a let down for me. Its his allround play that is getting people excited. If his linemates could finish some plays he would be well over the 30 point plateau. Stafford has had a horrible year in terms of goals.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
As far as Chucko goes. I ve seen almost all of the gopher games. I go to every Saturday home game. He gets better and better every time he plays. While it looks bad, well really bad, he will get back on D and has more than once been able to get his gloves down and try to block passes and play the man while skating backwards. Always keeps his head moving when in D zone to pick up forwards. On the O side he just plays like a bull. Drive hard and hit anything that is not a teammate. He works hard and it shows, his intelligence is there. But IMO power forwrds just take time, plus he is a year younger than most freshmen. If he gets his agility down i see him more of a first or very good second liner that plays PP.
Zajac: Seen him on TV twice and if NoDak makes it to final five i ll see him live. He looks good out there. At time he looked like the best player for NoDak. Did drive net hard and got a tip goal. Probally would benifit from better finishers around him, Solid passer too.
Who is better i do not know. If Chucko becomes a real power forward i give it to him. Right now i say Zajac.

And what is up with no Irmen or Potulny. Irmen is a coaches dream. Plays top PP, PK, plays 5 on 3 kills as F, plays in front of net and can pass of the corners, lays hits. What more do you want? Potulny does much the same, hits less plays top PP and kills with Irmen.
 

BrettNYR

Registered User
Mar 26, 2004
2,567
0
ryanlambert said:
Ben Walter > Hugh Jessiman
Great explanation and reasoning. :handclap:

Jessiman has the potential to be a star, but could easliy be a bust. Walter doesn't have NEAR the potential of Jessiman.

Please explain why you said that Walter is a better prospect than Jessiman.
 

Vic Rattlehead*

Guest
Broadway Crosby said:
Great explanation and reasoning. :handclap:

Jessiman has the potential to be a star, but could easliy be a bust. Walter doesn't have NEAR the potential of Jessiman.

Please explain why you said that Walter is a better prospect than Jessiman.

I don't know what he mean, but Walter this year is performing better than Jessiman. Can't say Walter is the better prospect, but the stats don't lie, Walter is outplaying Jessiman this year.

EDIT--- I didn't know about Jessimans injury, sorry about that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

johnny cool

Registered User
Feb 19, 2004
1,553
0
Broadway Crosby said:
Great explanation and reasoning. :handclap:

Jessiman has the potential to be a star, but could easliy be a bust. Walter doesn't have NEAR the potential of Jessiman.

Please explain why you said that Walter is a better prospect than Jessiman.
umm, it's about looking at the numbers.

the past two seasons, ben walter has had more points than hugh jessiman, and also hasn't had the constant injury problems that jessiman has. upside or not, jessiman is not performing at the level walter has been.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->