Prospect Info: Hurricanes Prospect Info and Discussion - Part VI

[NotOpie]

Playoffs or not, I wouldn't mind this. I would like the team to get an idea of what Fleury looks like at the NHL level before the season is out.

Yeah, maybe....but it would be hard to get a true read, especially if he's getting hung out to dry by his partner or even if he's trying to make up for his partner's mistakes....that's one of the things Justin Faulk did a couple of years ago.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Yeah, maybe....but it would be hard to get a true read, especially if he's getting hung out to dry by his partner or even if he's trying to make up for his partner's mistakes....that's one of the things Justin Faulk did a couple of years ago.

I really don't see this as an issue. His partner is likely going to be better and more stable and make less mistakes than he is, even if it is Dahlbeck or Tennyson. I think it would be worse giving him tougher assignments right out of the shoot even if it means a better partner, unless of course the coaches think he's ready for that. We'll still be able to get a read on him either way IMO. After a while, if he works his way up, then fine.

 

[NotOpie]

I really don't see this as an issue. His partner is likely going to be better and more stable and make less mistakes than he is, even if it is Dahlbeck or Tennyson. I think it would be worse giving him tougher assignments right out of the shoot even if it means a better partner, unless of course the coaches think he's ready for that. We'll still be able to get a read on him either way IMO. After a while, if he works his way up, then fine.

I don't disagree with the "tougher assignments" part. My point is that you've got more than 2 choices, one of which is to keep him in Charlotte. Talent-wise, Fleury is all but there now. It really comes down to speed of decision-making (which from my observations has improved), but I worry that without a tried and true vet, damage to the psyche could be done. Let's face it Dahlbeck and Tennyson are just going to be doing everything that they can to keep afloat. But I'm probably making more of this than I meant to, because I'd like to see what he can offer and, especially come the second half of this month and then the month of March, there's something like 14 home games to 9 away games. So a good number of favorable match ups could be managed.

 

[FaulkYouAho]

I don't disagree with the "tougher assignments" part. My point is that you've got more than 2 choices, one of which is to keep him in Charlotte. Talent-wise, Fleury is all but there now. It really comes down to speed of decision-making (which from my observations has improved), but I worry that without a tried and true vet, damage to the psyche could be done. Let's face it Dahlbeck and Tennyson are just going to be doing everything that they can to keep afloat. But I'm probably making more of this than I meant to, because I'd like to see what he can offer and, especially come the second half of this month and then the month of March, there's something like 14 home games to 9 away games. So a good number of favorable match ups could be managed.

i agree in every single way but i think that we need to pair him with hanifin because look at how pesce and slavin are doing both are extremely young and one of the best if not THE best defensive line in the nhl! the fans around the league are starting to notice it more and more every night/game. With those 2 having the chemestry they have together, why don't we do the same for those 2 and see if it works out. When Tenneson and Dahlbeck both came in here both of them were like sparks of energy but they have just fizzled out now and its scaring me on how bad they are doing rn.

 

[geehaad]

right out of the shoot

Because I think you care to know its proper use:

"right out of the chute"

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Because I think you care to know its proper use:

"right out of the chute"

I'd like to blame spell check like most people do, but that would be a lie. It was just carelessly typing quickly and not thinking about it.

 

[geehaad]

I'd like to blame spell check like most people do

That's so yesterday.

Today, it's all about blaming your History teacher.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Because I think you care to know its proper use:

"right out of the chute"

During a power play: "Right out of the shoooooooot"

 

[neelynugs]

now that we're 50+ games into the year, wondering how you guys see a top 5-10 prospect list. anyone making a big jump since the summer? and where would wallmark slot in?

 

[NotOpie]

now that we're 50+ games into the year, wondering how you guys see a top 5-10 prospect list. anyone making a big jump since the summer? and where would wallmark slot in?

When I look at our prospect pool I'm moderately excited. I'd like to see a few more break outs, but we've got a plethora of 2nd/3rd/4th line tweeners. We do have some valid high end guys too. I'd just like to see more. As much as I envy our defensive depth, I use AZ's forward depth as something of a measuring stick. When we've got that level of potential is when I'll truly get excited. That said, it is really difficult to rank these guys. Yet, when I do, I try to focus on the guys I think are both NHL ready and can actually have an impact. So my uneducated top 10 would be:

1. Haydn Fleury
2. Nic Roy
3. Julien Gauthier
4. Valentin Zykov
5. Lucas Wallmark
6. Janne Kuokkanen
7. Phil DiGiuseppe
8. Roland McKeown
9. Aleksi Saarela
10. Jake Bean

HM 1. Andrew Poturalski
HM 2. Jake Chelios
HM 3. Hudson Elynuik
HM 4. Spencer Smallman
HM 5. David Cotton

 

[MinJaBen]

When I look at our prospect pool I'm moderately excited. I'd like to see a few more break outs, but we've got a plethora of 2nd/3rd/4th line tweeners. We do have some valid high end guys too. I'd just like to see more. As much as I envy our defensive depth, I use AZ's forward depth as something of a measuring stick. When we've got that level of potential is when I'll truly get excited. That said, it is really difficult to rank these guys. Yet, when I do, I try to focus on the guys I think are both NHL ready and can actually have an impact. So my uneducated top 10 would be:

1. Haydn Fleury
2. Nic Roy
3. Julien Gauthier
4. Valentin Zykov
5. Lucas Wallmark
6. Janne Kuokkanen
7. Phil DiGiuseppe
8. Roland McKeown
9. Aleksi Saarela
10. Jake Bean

HM 1. Andrew Poturalski
HM 2. Jake Chelios
HM 3. Hudson Elynuik
HM 4. Spencer Smallman
HM 5. David Cotton

I think you (and a lot of others) are ranking Bean and Mckeown too low compared to our other prospects. If you are ranking them by "both NHL ready and can actually have an impact" I would think that McKeown jumps up to position 2 or 3 on your list. And I think Bean will challenge for a spot on the roster next year, ultimately failing due to the ability to send him back to juniors and not burn his first ELC year, but he will be very close.

 

[A Star is Burns]

Wow, that is quite some list.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

When I look at our prospect pool I'm moderately excited. I'd like to see a few more break outs, but we've got a plethora of 2nd/3rd/4th line tweeners. We do have some valid high end guys too. I'd just like to see more. As much as I envy our defensive depth, I use AZ's forward depth as something of a measuring stick. When we've got that level of potential is when I'll truly get excited. That said, it is really difficult to rank these guys. Yet, when I do, I try to focus on the guys I think are both NHL ready and can actually have an impact. So my uneducated top 10 would be:

1. Haydn Fleury
2. Nic Roy
3. Julien Gauthier
4. Valentin Zykov
5. Lucas Wallmark
6. Janne Kuokkanen
7. Phil DiGiuseppe
8. Roland McKeown
9. Aleksi Saarela
10. Jake Bean

HM 1. Andrew Poturalski
HM 2. Jake Chelios
HM 3. Hudson Elynuik
HM 4. Spencer Smallman
HM 5. David Cotton

Out of curiosity, what makes you rank Zykov so high? I watch none of these players, but I've also heard basically nothing about him (positive or negative) all season. Looking at his stats he's doing ok in Charlotte, but not super well. Certainly not knocking him as a prospect, but curious as to what would make you put him over a guy like Wallmark, doing better things in the same league at the same age (as a rookie no less).

Also, I think you've rated Bean super low, but I doubt that's worth discussing...

 

[NotOpie]

Out of curiosity, what makes you rank Zykov so high? I watch none of these players, but I've also heard basically nothing about him (positive or negative) all season. Looking at his stats he's doing ok in Charlotte, but not super well. Certainly not knocking him as a prospect, but curious as to what would make you put him over a guy like Wallmark, doing better things in the same league at the same age (as a rookie no less).

Also, I think you've rated Bean super low, but I doubt that's worth discussing...

I admit, I'm probably higher on him than most, but he's got maybe the best shot on the Checkers, skates very well, and isn't afraid to play the body. He's also much better defensively than advertised. To me, he needs a little more polish, but he already plays an NHL-like game.

EDIT: I have a bias for guys that I perceive to be closer to the NHL. I think Bean is at least 3 years away.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

1. Haydn Fleury: 6'3", 221 lbs
2. Nic Roy: 6'4", 208 lbs
3. Julien Gauthier: 6'4", 225 lbs
4. Valentin Zykov: 6'1", 224 lbs
5. Lucas Wallmark: 6'0", 176 lbs
6. Janne Kuokkanen: 6'1", 188 lbs
7. Phil DiGiuseppe: 6'0", 200 lbs
8. Roland McKeown: 6'1", 195 lbs
9. Aleksi Saarela: 5'11", 198 lbs
10. Jake Bean: 6'1", 173 lbs

Admit it, you just put all the guys on the top of your list because they are big.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

EDIT: I have a bias for guys that I perceive to be closer to the NHL. I think Bean is at least 3 years away.

Shouldn't that apply to Kuokanen then? He's still 2-3 years away also.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

My totally uneducated ranking of NotOPie's top 10. I'm admittedly biased toward defensemen.

1. Fleury: Why? has all the physical tools and think he'll put it together
2. Bean: Why? Has a very unique skillset that could thrive in today's NHL. Higher risk prospect though, but higher reward also.
3. Gauthier: Why? Already big, strong kid who can skate and score.
4. McKeown: Why? Jack of all trades defenseman who puts defense 1st.
5. Roy: Why? If his skating improves, he has some really good hands and vision.
T-6. Kuokkanen: Why? Like his skill set, but not sure about him. Has a ways to go IMO.
T-6. Saarela: Why? He's a goal scorer vs. the playmaker Kuokkanen is. I don't know if his high end is as high as Kuokkanen, but I think he has a better chance of reaching it.
8. Walmark: Why? Not as high on him as others might be, but think he can become a good bottom six player.
9. Di Guiseppe: Why? I could move Phil up or down a couple notches and still be fine. Not sure he'll ever be more than an NHL/AHL tweener.
10. Zykov: Haven't seen/read/heard enough to say, so I put him at the bottom.

 

[geehaad]

Wow, I had no idea Fleury is so big; he's 1 inch shorter than Gauthier but only 4 pounds lighter. As much as we believe Gauthier is a beast physically, unless Fleury's weight is from a ton of fat, he's right there with him, but we don't talk about Fleury in that same way.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Wow, I had no idea Fleury is so big; he's 1 inch shorter than Gauthier but only 4 pounds lighter. As much as we believe Gauthier is a beast physically, unless Fleury's weight is from a ton of fat, he's right there with him, but we don't talk about Fleury in that same way.

I was surprised as well. I thought he was in the 205-210 range, but the Canes website lists him as 221.

EDIT: Weird:

Canes: 221
Hockeydb: 207
Eliteprospects: 220
Red Deer's roster last year: 207
Charlotte Checkers Website: 198

We can argue whether 221 is right, but Fleury was 203 at the scouting combine during the 2014 draft, so it's clear the Checker's website is wrong.

 

[Unsustainable]

My totally uneducated ranking of NotOPie's top 10. I'm admittedly biased toward defensemen.

1. Fleury: Why? has all the physical tools and think he'll put it together
2. Bean: Why? Has a very unique skillset that could thrive in today's NHL. Higher risk prospect though, but higher reward also.
3. Gauthier: Why? Already big, strong kid who can skate and score.
4. McKeown: Why? Jack of all trades defenseman who puts defense 1st.
5. Roy: Why? If his skating improves, he has some really good hands and vision.
T-6. Kuokkanen: Why? Like his skill set, but not sure about him. Has a ways to go IMO.
T-6. Saarela: Why? He's a goal scorer vs. the playmaker Kuokkanen is. I don't know if his high end is as high as Kuokkanen, but I think he has a better chance of reaching it.
8. Walmark: Why? Not as high on him as others might be, but think he can become a good bottom six player.
9. Di Guiseppe: Why? I could move Phil up or down a couple notches and still be fine. Not sure he'll ever be more than an NHL/AHL tweener.
10. Zykov: Haven't seen/read/heard enough to say, so I put him at the bottom.

I'd probably put Kuok above Roy and tie Roy with Saa

 

[geehaad]

Canes: 221
Hockeydb: 207
Eliteprospects: 220
Red Deer's roster last year: 207
Charlotte Checkers Website: 198

Ah, yes....of course. I feel silly now for having believed the first number that I saw. The reported weight (and height) of an athlete should always be taken with a grain of salt. My mistake, for sure.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I'd probably put Kuok above Roy and tie Roy with Saa

I can't argue with that. The times I've seen Kuokkanen, I didn't come away nearly as impressed. I think some feel he might become the next Aho, but what makes Aho so impressive is his brain. That kid thinks the game so well and so quickly and while he is skilled, there are gobs of young, skilled players who never amount to much. Heck, people were raving about "sea bass" from the moment he stepped on the ice in Carolina after being drafted and he's been nothing short of remarkable every step of the way since then.

For me, Roy is all about skating. He's big, smart, has good hands, and during the WJC, showed a physical side to his game (he was much more physical than Gauthier). If his skating continues to improve, he could be a real force down the road. A lot of things have to come together, but that's how I see it.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Ah, yes....of course. I feel silly now for having believed the first number that I saw. The reported weight (and height) of an athlete should always be taken with a grain of salt. My mistake, for sure.

I just took the numbers off the Canes website, and since it fit my narrative, I went with it.

I'd be a bit surprised if he went from 207 to 221 in 1 year. Maybe they transposed numbers and it's more like 212? That would make more sense.

 

[NotOpie]

Shouldn't that apply to Kuokanen then? He's still 2-3 years away also.

Yeah, probably, but I'm an admitted Kuokkanen fan. From the little I've been able to see of McKeown with the Checkers, he's still a very good prospect, but I'm not convinced on his NHL upside. It very well could be there, but I'm crediting what has turned into some NHL experience to PDG that might be a bit over-weighted and, in my opinion, both Zykov and Wallmark are playing better than Roland at this point. It doesn't mean that he's not a very good prospect. When I looked over the pool, I came away impressed, even with my usual hopefulness for some of the later round picks (Cotton and Elynuik, in particular).

 

[NotOpie]

Wow, I had no idea Fleury is so big; he's 1 inch shorter than Gauthier but only 4 pounds lighter. As much as we believe Gauthier is a beast physically, unless Fleury's weight is from a ton of fat, he's right there with him, but we don't talk about Fleury in that same way.

I just took the numbers off the Canes website, and since it fit my narrative, I went with it.

I'd be a bit surprised if he went from 207 to 221 in 1 year. Maybe they transposed numbers and it's more like 212? That would make more sense.

My understanding is that EliteProspects actually updates their height and weight charts based on the best available info. So I tend to look at those guys as the most accurate. When Fleury came into prospects camp this year he was noticeably bigger. He had put on pounds of muscle.

The thing I like about Roy is that every time I've watched him his skating seems to improve. He comes across as a very coachable, trainable guy.

I have a different read on Kuokkanen in that I think he's very, very talented and also thinks the game very well. Where I think he really excels is with his vision. That's why he's such a good passer in my opinion. Not on the same level as Seabass, mind you, but still a noted strength.