how can you tell how high a prospects ceiling is?

[LordBinkie]

i read some posts and people say x player has a higher ceiling than y player. Sometimes although player Y is better than play X at a certain time how can one tell that play Y has a higher ceiling? and they are both the same age

Click to read more...

 

[HemskyToHall*]

Scouting reports. Or if the players shows dominating shifts at an early age in the NHL.

 

[Analyzer*]

How a player does in a gut check game.
How a player does throughout the season.

If player A and Player B both have around the same stats, but player B steps up in the playoffs and throughout the season has more dominating games, then Player B's potential is higher, but player A is the safer pick, as he tends to play with consistency. He can't take over a game like Player B can, but night in, night out here's there with a solid effort while Player B can dominate, put in a solid effort and you won't notice him.

One player can have more potential than another by what he does. However, it's just based on a play. You could say player A is a 5-15 pick, Player B is a 10-20 pick and have Player C be a 4th round pick at best, but then Player C becomes the best player out of the 3.

 

[SaskOilers]

You would have to enter their house and do some measurements.

 

[McNasty]

In my opinion there are certain players that consistently put together good shifts, and frequently put up points. These are your 60-70 point players. You also have the guys who have the ability to take an entire shift over, or carry a team on their back. To me those are the players who you can say have a high ceiling, because you can never be sure if that part of their game will translate to the NHL level.

 

[joe89]

There are two things to look at when comparing two prospects at the same age, A) How high is their ceiling? and B) How likely the player is to reach said ceiling.

Lets say player A only puts up 30 points but creates a ton of chances and is showing gamebreaking abilities. Then you have player B putting up 45, but there is nothing flashy whatsoever about his game and he is not very often a factor. You can see that he's not very likely to improve his numbers a whole lot, maybe up to 60-65 in his prime with a good two-way game . Meanwhile player A just needs to figure out how to turn his talent into production, and is looking like he has the tools to put up a ppg pace in the future, so you can say he has a higher ceiling even if he currently isn't quite as effective as player B.

 

[LordBinkie]

Alright thanks everyone

 

[Xander Crews]

Another reason is their bodies/abilities.

In the upcoming draft RNH is thought to have maube the highest ceiling because he has really great skills... but that ceiling is dependent on him growing more and filling out his body to be able to compete in the NHL. While other players are already more filled out so they play just as good but dont have as much upside.

Basically is your super skilled but not grown then you might get the same amount of points as someone whos more grown but less skilled. Obviously the player who can still grow has the higher upside.

 

[scoutman1]

There is no 100% sure way to tell but here is what us as scouts use to try to determin this...

The players improvment through the year, are they getting better? or are they just staying the same the whole year where they are doing well but other players are catching up, if the others are catching up then you have to look at ok what is it about this player that is not causing him to improve...have to look at a number of factors:

1. Look at last year, was it his size or skating speed that caused him to do very well against lower level and now that he is in the bigger leagues he can not adjust.

2. The players work ethic off the ice, is he dedicated, a guy who is going to work hard at achiving what he wants is going to do a lot better than a guy who gets by just on talent.

3. Hockey Awareness is a big one, you can teach someone to skate well, or handle a puck well but they way they see the game and think it is totally different that is what a player should have to be successfull.

Those are just three there are SO MANY i use as a scout to determin...

comparison is im going to use:

Nathan MacKinnon and Michael Lyle

though Lyle and MacKinnon IMO both are about equal talent wise in skill, MacKinnon is dominating in Shattuck whole Lyle is dominating point wise in a league as Nova Scotia Major Midget League...all through the years MacKinnon and Lyle played on the same line in Hockey Nova Scotia teams and will be on the CWG team together, both are amazing talents and Lyle outscored MacKinnon in the recent Atlantic Challenge Cup in Moncton...but MacKinnon I would take in a heart beat over Lyle I would not even have to think and here is why:

Lyle:
Pros:
Amazing hands with the puck, excellent playmaking, sees the ice very well, excellent shooting ability, has the ability to get past any defense, size.

Cons:
Work Ethic, heart, consistancy, Lazy.

MacKinnon:
Pros:
Amazing skating, great hands, amazing shooting, great playmaking, strong and good two way, great work ethic on the ice, plays with heart, and gives you 100% everyshift and does what it takes to win.

Cons:
Does too much by himself sometimes, needs to slow the pace down sometimes to use his teammates.


------------------------------------------------

So because of his heart, determination and work ethic MacKinnon has a much high cealing talent wise than Lyle, because both are amazingly skilled most probably do not know of Lyle on this board...but both are amazing players, but consistancy comes with hard work and MacKinnon has that and his great work ethic causs him to train harder on the ice causing him to always improve. Lyle has the ability to get drafted 2nd to 3rd overall in the QMJHL draft, but because of his low cealing because he doesn't want to work on the ice he might see himself go in the 2nd to 3rd round.

 

[Bank Shot]

What logo is on the front of the jersey.

The prospect that my team drafted has a higher ceiling then the prospect your team drafted.

 

[Bjindaho]

i read some posts and people say x player has a higher ceiling than y player. Sometimes although player Y is better than play X at a certain time how can one tell that play Y has a higher ceiling? and they are both the same age

Style of game - Is the players game something that can be played at the next level

Example - Mathieu Perreault versus Claude Giroux. Perreault plays a speed game that is predicated on simply skating by people a lot of times. Giroux could do this also, but usually preferred to play within a set offense.



Frame - Is the player 5'6 like Rocco Grimaldi or 6'1 like Jonathan Huberdeau

Plain and simple, a small player will have shorter reach and his head will always be in a bad spot for hits (making him a concussion risk). A bigger kid may not have full use of his reach and may develop it over time (ex: Chara, Myers)



What he does away from the puck - Does he know where the rebound will go? Does he know where his opponent is planning on going? Does he move without the puck, especially in the offensive zone? Is he moving to soft spots to become a shooting option? Does he follow the puck back or does he know which man he is supposed to cover?

Ex: Rico Fata - the man that could fly but always seemed to be slightly out of position




Commitment - You can see commitment based on whether he makes the same mistakes over and over again, shift to shift, game to game or year to year. If a guy at 19 isn't better than he was at 17 (Ex: Esposito's offensive game), that raises some serious flags.




Shot/Puck Handling - Most people go straight to these categories to rank players, but they are things that a kid can develop making them less important. That doesn't mean they are useless, because a kid with excellent hands (Tavares, Jurco) can do some things that well beyond the realm of what can be developed.




Skating stride - Does the player have a fluid stride? Or is it clunky?

This is a big thing that separates a John Tavares/Dany Heatley from a Steven Stamkos or Sidney Crosby. You can only improve a clunky stride so much.

 

[JFA87-66-99]

There is no 100% sure way to tell but here is what us as scouts use to try to determin this...

The players improvment through the year, are they getting better? or are they just staying the same the whole year where they are doing well but other players are catching up, if the others are catching up then you have to look at ok what is it about this player that is not causing him to improve...have to look at a number of factors:

1. Look at last year, was it his size or skating speed that caused him to do very well against lower level and now that he is in the bigger leagues he can not adjust.

2. The players work ethic off the ice, is he dedicated, a guy who is going to work hard at achiving what he wants is going to do a lot better than a guy who gets by just on talent.

3. Hockey Awareness is a big one, you can teach someone to skate well, or handle a puck well but they way they see the game and think it is totally different that is what a player should have to be successfull.

Those are just three there are SO MANY i use as a scout to determin...

comparison is im going to use:

Nathan MacKinnon and Michael Lyle

though Lyle and MacKinnon IMO both are about equal talent wise in skill, MacKinnon is dominating in Shattuck whole Lyle is dominating point wise in a league as Nova Scotia Major Midget League...all through the years MacKinnon and Lyle played on the same line in Hockey Nova Scotia teams and will be on the CWG team together, both are amazing talents and Lyle outscored MacKinnon in the recent Atlantic Challenge Cup in Moncton...but MacKinnon I would take in a heart beat over Lyle I would not even have to think and here is why:

Lyle:
Pros:
Amazing hands with the puck, excellent playmaking, sees the ice very well, excellent shooting ability, has the ability to get past any defense, size.

Cons:
Work Ethic, heart, consistancy, Lazy.

MacKinnon:
Pros:
Amazing skating, great hands, amazing shooting, great playmaking, strong and good two way, great work ethic on the ice, plays with heart, and gives you 100% everyshift and does what it takes to win.

Cons:
Does too much by himself sometimes, needs to slow the pace down sometimes to use his teammates.


------------------------------------------------

So because of his heart, determination and work ethic MacKinnon has a much high cealing talent wise than Lyle, because both are amazingly skilled most probably do not know of Lyle on this board...but both are amazing players, but consistancy comes with hard work and MacKinnon has that and his great work ethic causs him to train harder on the ice causing him to always improve. Lyle has the ability to get drafted 2nd to 3rd overall in the QMJHL draft, but because of his low cealing because he doesn't want to work on the ice he might see himself go in the 2nd to 3rd round.

You should have used Nathan MacKinnon and Taylor Cammarata as your example seeing that Cammarata has been outscoring MacKinnon the past 2 seasons at shattuck. But still a good comparism though.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

You would have to enter their house and do some measurements.

How am i the only one that found this hilarious?

 

[Passchendaele]

How am i the only one that found this hilarious?

I did. And didn't even drink. Wow.