Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by Holly Gunning, Feb 4, 2004.
It makes me cringe seeing that Andrei Medvedev is considered a top prospect for Calgary.
Other than that, good job.
Although, I do have a major beef with Detroit's ranking. I still don't see how they aren't in the 21-30 group.
Nashville and Los Angeles are lower than I expected.
Great Work HF staff!
Sabres top 10!
This list is getting ulgy. Flames? Why are they so high? Ouch, Sabres top 10? Please.
Panthers are so low.
This is a bad list, i'm sorry just an ugly llist.
interesting stuff. for the first time in a long time Calgary actually has a handful of young players CONTRIBUTING in the NHL , and I'd rather have them doing that than propping up our prospect ranking
one small quibble might be that it is worth mentioning Yuri Trubachev as a skilled forward prospect, although I agree he's not a bluechipper...and in general that is an area of weakness for Calgary
because I'm pretty happy with the progress of 2nd tier prospects like Trubachev, Moore, Maki, McElhinney, Frogren etc I'm satisfied with our current prospect grouping, but can accept a number 19 ranking
didn't realize 19 was 'so high'
I dunno? 19 sounds about right?
Definitely appreciate the hard work but the Calgary write up is extremely disappointing.
Phaneuf is a "stay at home" defensemen? He's currently 2nd on his TEAM in scoring (both points and goals) and that's only because he missed some time at the World Juniors. He was their leading scorer when he left. He's currently the 5th highest scoring defensemen in the WHL at age 18. He had superb totals at age 17 as well with 16 goals and another 7 in the playoffs.
That's a BAD mistake. But not nearly as bad as calling Tim Ramholt a stay at home defensemen which the writeup then proceeds to do. I've watched the kid in camp and he's a skilled puck rushing defensemen. Calling him a stay at homer couldn't be further from the truth. He's got 29 points in 34 games this season.
Disappointed that Yuri Trubachev doesn't deserve even a mention despite the fact that Sutter called him one of our top 5 prospects before last draft.
But calling Phaneuf and Ramholt "stay at home" defensemen is an embarassing mistake and one that should be rectified immediately. I have to question whether the writer knows much of anything about those two or has seen them play at all.
I'm a pretty big Oilers fan, but I'm not sure they are really any deeper than OTT or NSH or whomever. Of course, maybe they are at #9, and it's just kind of close, I guess we'll see.
I think the main, ehem, beef with that is him is his physical prowess. Okay, I know nothing of the guy, but he has looked like Jabba in the few pictures I have seen of him.
Still, I love the Flames for picking Phaneuf. Such a strong prospect imo.
So as not to have any other tangents, Im ending this message now...
So the remaining teams for top 1-9 organizational rankings are...
Edmonton, Montreal, Penguins, Buffalo, Columbus, Atlanta, Washington, New Jersey, and Phoenix.
Atlanta is suprising to me as they don't appear very strong aside from two exceptional prospects in Coburn and Lehtonen.
New Jersey drafting so well with later picks while remaining a cup favourite most years is pretty sick I guess Lou and company deserve a pretty huge pat on the back.
Two years ago, Detroit was ranked the worst or second worst in the league. And it was a justifiable ranking, IMO. (No one had anyway of knowing Zetterberg and Datsyuk would be who they are)
Now they've moved up to 15th overall despite not having any first rounders in the last two drafts.
Hudler/Kronwall/Grigorenko seem to be the leaders. Filppula, Fleischmann and Jamtin could become good NHLers. Same with Meech, QUincey, Howard and Liv.
But IMO, I'm not sure they deserve to be that high. Hudler, IMO, is still a question mark. Grigorenko is obviously a question mark due to the injury.
Still, my guess is that the people who ranked these teams are giving Detroit some credit for past draft steals.
There were a couple of people that doubted the 21-30 spots (degroat being the most vocal of them all), but I figured that they had some validity to them. Now I join the doubters with things like the above, or the below.
Undersized? HF's Dallas prospects page lists Vagner as 6-2 210. While I understand that his size doesn't make him a behemoth, I certainly would not call that undersized.
These are resources readily available to the contributors of the articles. While I commend them on assembling a list that is far better than what I could do, I have to say that it looks to be more and more half-assed as the subsequent lists are churned out.
The CGY write up was done by a Calgarian in fact.
Phaneuf puts up numbers but I wouldn't call him an offensive defenceman either. He has a great shot from the point but he's not a Phil Housley or a Scott Niedermeyer. I don't think it's a insult to call him a defensive d-man... maybe a defensive d-man with offensive upside? Better?
The problem with Minnesota is yes they are missing defensemen in their systems, noteable players in their system are Eric Reitz, Z-man, and Bolduc, Misharin is a darkhorse that could end up making the club too, (2 that could, 2 on the wings) but the other thing is this:
The Wild are a fairly young team and have picked up some good defensemen, Henry, Mitchell, and Schultz, Zyuzin and Kuba are throw ins. Yes they might need a defenseman or two but it's not a very big glaring need at the moment.
They are in fact missing scoring wingers.
Also you forgot Wallin as a key player, serious. The guy is going under a lot of radars but he has the make of the Sedins.
Again, great job, boys and girls! Thanks a ton for the work you put in...for free, might I point out...
I'm surprised the Devils will be ranked in the top 10. That's pretty cool considering Martin and Hale graduated this year. I guess that the emergence of Suglobov and Pihlman in Albany is bigger than I thought.
Not counting the World Juniors, I've seen Phaneuf play a half dozen times or so. I'd hesitate to call him an offensive defenseman. He is definitely the most talented defenseman on Red Deer, and because of this he'll log tons of ice, and on a successful Red Deer team he'll get some points.
That's not to say that Phaneuf is a product of Red Deer's offense as a team, but I'd call him a defensive defenseman with offensive potential more then anything.
NJ continues to rise, my constant bickering must have done something over the years...I think Montreal will get top spot with Pittsburgh in second.
Is it that much of a deal that Phaneuf and Ramhold are considered stay at home defensmen. Stay at home and Physical defensmen often times put up decent point totals in junior and once they turn pro get nothing. Phaneuf will be more important to the organization as a shutdown guy like Stevens anyway. Ramhold hasn't been impressive at all latley. There is nothing extreamly offensive about him. He is a good skater and has a nice outlet pass, other then that the only points he gets is on the PP. Hardly an offensive dmen.
I really find it hard to grasp how LA goes down after having three first round picks. (and than adding Pushkarov, Munce and Murray with their next 3 picks) Yeah, they traded Anshakov but it hardly balances it out.
I think the whole lack of a 'stud' goaltending prospect is certainly overemphasized. Goalies are so enigmatic that (outside of a few top prospects) you never what you are going to get with them and I would hazard a guess that goaltending prospects are generally a much tougher read than player prospects. And, even than, Munce is a comparable goalie prospect to a lot of other teams top goaltending prospects.
To each his own, I suppose.
LA lost Frolov, Cammerelli and Brown.
I see now. I didn't think Frolov had been rated last year but looking at the list now I see he was. So I guess I don't agree with last years rankings either. :p
That said, anyone else think the prospect criteria is a little iffy? Guys like Brown, Bergeron, Horton etc. go from being drafted to losing prospect "status" (they are very much still prospects) right away. If I had any say (which I don't ) I would try and seperate the prospects into 'pro' prospects and 'junior' prospects and after 'graduating' from the junior ranks, you are still considered a 'pro' prospect until you firmly establish yourself in the NHL (150? games) or become too old to be eligible.
As the writers must expect criticism, I will laud it on them.
This list, while not terrible, falls not too far from it. While I do not pretend to know more about the Preds or the Kings than the writers, I would say that 90% of the folks on this board would take either one of their prospect bases over, say, the Ottawa Sens (just picked one of the teams above both of those teams at random).
Top end prospects are not nearly valued enough as they used to be, or ought to be.
And while my Canucks have decent prospects, they are not in any way ahead of Calgary in this department. Yes, I understand that the young prospects/players who are playing this year are not considered prospects anymore, but even still - I find it a touch ridiculous to have a team that boasts Ryan Suter, Kevin Klein, Timofei Shishkanov, Brian Finley, Scottie Upshall, amongst others, to be behind so many teams. Same goes for the Kings - yes, they do not have a top end goaltender, but this didn't seem to be a problem for a few other teams.
I'll be interesting to see where Washington ranks.
Miller, Vanek, Roy (probably not considered in these rankings), Klepis, Paille, Pominville, Bartovic, Gaustad, Ryan, Fabry, MacArthur, Janik.
It's not that hard to figure out why. They have two STAR-potential prospects and a lot of players who will likely be in the NHL even if they don't reach their top end.
Separate names with a comma.