Flames Draft Watcher
Registered User
SmokeyClause said:Oh and while you are at it, tell me why the Stanley Cup is more important than being ranked #1 in HF organizational rankings? I'm just dying to know.
SmokeyClause said:Oh and while you are at it, tell me why the Stanley Cup is more important than being ranked #1 in HF organizational rankings? I'm just dying to know.
Mothra said:Many? Thats a bit of an overstatement.......even in the list the HF exact wording is
"there were some that would suggest that"
'Splatman Phanutier said:Maybe I haven't been reading this board enough or something, but man this has to be one of the weirder threads I've seen.
Or in Vlad's terms, "HFmania."
I mean... there's even one post here that listed some 30 guys that should have made it. I wonder if everyone realizes its a list of top 50, and just 50.
Yeah, but Splat, you know that as soon as the "Habs, Leafs, Rangers, Blues, defensive defenseman, small defenseman, Swedish goalie," fan finds out that "Stuart, Kronwall, Lundqvist, Senja, Perezhogin...." doesn't make the list, the bias of HF against their guy/team/particular stereotype means that HF has to get raked over the coals.Splatman Phanutier said:Maybe I haven't been reading this board enough or something, but man this has to be one of the weirder threads I've seen.
Or in Vlad's terms, "HFmania."
I mean... there's even one post here that listed some 30 guys that should have made it. I wonder if everyone realizes its a list of top 50, and just 50.
:lol :lol :lolGeorge Bachul said:I am suprised that Japanese goalie fans aren't giving us the gears over Yutaka Fukufiji's omission.
dawgbone said:GURU, about Bergeron...
The problem is, he is a small guy, something like 5-9. He's never going to be able to play against the top players, meaning at best he's a PP specialist who sees time agaisnt the oppositions 3rd/4th lines.
Flames Draft Watcher said:You fail to see how size affects a goalie? That seems extremely hard to believe.
Typically these days when a goalie can't see a shot he butterflies to cover the bottom of the net. This tends to leave the uppermost portion of the net open. With small goalies you get a large amount of space open up there because their torso does not cover it. With a 6'4 goalie who is properly positioned you would have much less of the net open when he is in the butterfly.
It's pretty obvious if you've watched the game. A guy like a Fred Brathwaite let's in a lot of top shelf screened goals whereas guys like Turek/Luongo/Kolzig/etc tend to stop more of those because they cover more of the net. It's a concept I would think most kids would intuitively understand.
SmokeyClause said:
I didn't say he was not on the list because no one knew who he has. What I said was that I think his numbers weren't rationalized with his injury (like Michalek's and Grigorenko's) because no one knew about the injury and it's severity. There was one post on the main board about Shish's injury (that I recall) and very little talk about it outside of the Nashville board. The Michalek and Grigorenko injuries are much more mainstream and rightly so given the circumstances. Some people saw their numbers and subsequent lack of production and used the injury as an excuse. I'm not saying it's wrong; I'm just saying it didn't happen in Shishkanov's place. I'm not sure Shish should even be on the list. I was merely defending my stance that Shish's being left off could be attributed to him playing injured. If he puts up 70+ points in his rookie AHL season at the age of 20, I think he might be on that list. Just my opinion.
Bergeron is a guy that I watched a lot. Although he came on down the stretch, the first part of his year wasn't very good causing his demotion. He is small, inconsistent in his own zone, but offensively good. That begs being one dimensional. As Mark Stuart's biggest deficiency being lack of probably got him left off the list, same with Bergeron.HOCKEY_GURU said:well I watched him many times last year....and his defence was more than adequate, he weighs 190+ pounds... for his height u can imagine his built, apperantly hes also the strongest man on the oilers..he can benchpress more than anyone on the oilers team (according to oilers staff/coaches), as for his Ofence he was at about 40 point pace..and i thought he coulda got so many more had the bounces gone his way. (hitting posts...great set ups missed etc)...so I think he could have a better points per game..so is 50 points that inconceivable? i dont think so... i can see a Rafalski type player here.. but again thats IMHO, keep in mind chelios was about 180 lbs... some players can play bigger than mere stature...like i said before ..id rather have such players on my team than someone that has a 50% chance of being a bust ... but again thats my opnion
Epsilon said:I think it's more of a case of the two guys you mentioned being much more highly regarded than Shishkanov prior to being injured, and so injuries arn't enough to toss the off the list. Whereas Shish would be a 3-50 guy normally and so a lengthly injury is the sort of thing that would put him into the 50-75ish range.
We can all agree on one thing...if the start that Grigorenko had was taken into account he probably wouldn't make the list. I saw the reports from Russia that he wasn't very good, his stats weren't good, but the list was made not using the beginning of this year's hockey as influence. If it was, guys like Kaigorodov, Lundqvist...may have had a better shot at it. Slow starts like Vanek, Montoya (although he has picked it up recently) might have had them drop.SmokeyClause said:It could very well be the case. In any event, in my opinion, neither Grigs nor Shish should be in the top 50 (right now) though Shish is making a nice case so far this year. I think Michalek is too high, but not by about 5 slots of so.
George Bachul said:Bergeron is a guy that I watched a lot. Although he came on down the stretch, the first part of his year wasn't very good causing his demotion. He is small, inconsistent in his own zone, but offensively good. That begs being one dimensional. As Mark Stuart's biggest deficiency being lack of probably got him left off the list, same with Bergeron.
There is other comparative things that have to happen too. People on the committee have to judge players based on where they are in time. Trevor Daley who is a very similar player to Bergeron and a better overall skater in my opinion is three years younger than Bergeron and in my opinion will project to be a better player at 24 than Bergeron is right now. He is not on the list. Age is also a factor because you have to take the difference into account when making the projection.HOCKEY_GURU said:If thats how you see it fair enough ..I can accept that, i look at deficiencies as can they be corrected, after his demotion it seemed like he did... often top notch prospects are given a luxury of making mistakes in order to learn.. so why not him too?..its the upside I look for
George Bachul said:There is other comparative things that have to happen too. People on the committee have to judge players based on where they are in time. Trevor Daley who is a very similar player to Bergeron and a better overall skater in my opinion is three years younger than Bergeron and in my opinion will project to be a better player at 24 than Bergeron is right now. He is not on the list. Age is also a factor because you have to take the difference into account when making the projection.
Same with the much maligned 25 year old Peter Sejna. I would say that at the age of 24 that Christopher Higgins will be a solid NHLer. Peter Sejna was not. Tough to compare, but that is how it has to be done.
NYRangers said:But if a goalie is short you obviously shoot high. And when hes tall you shoot lower. I see how it can be different to cover the net. But thats not hieght, thats also how broad your shoulders are. You can have a lot of body mass and take up a lot of the net but not be tall.
Maybe they should call it:SmokeyClause said:'
You think you are having fun now, give it time and someone's going to post a list of 50+ players that should have been included but weren't.
Splatman Phanutier said:Maybe they should call it:
"Hockey's Future Top 50 i Prospects"
so you can say the ommitted ones are imaginary!
Bwahahaha... oh god, I'm such a nerd.
So, should I be waiting around for somebody's Top 84 prospect list?
Marek Schwarz is not playing in Asia.Franz said:I still don't get this "Lundqvist plays SEL, NA is different" argument. Using this logic: Why is Ovechkin on this list? Never played in NA. Why is this goalie called Marek Schwarz on this list? Every player not playing in NA shlould be cut off then.
SmokeyClause said:Why is Horton not priveledged along the lines of Staal or Chistov? That's the crux of my argument. What is the big difference between them? Does the 65 figure really adequately represent a cutoff?
SmokeyClause said:Oh and while you are at it, tell me why the Stanley Cup is more important than being ranked #1 in HF organizational rankings? I'm just dying to know.