If you were GM picking class of '03 now

[Kaizer]

tssssst....Kaizer, we were joking

I know I'm about proven/unproven. Imo, Zherdev is proven enough

 

[Drake1588]

Such a great draft... it's never easy figuring out how to dislodge one player or another, or on the basis of what criteria, but you'd think 100+ goals in two seasons in what is considered the most physical, lowest scoring of the CHL leagues would nudge Eric Fehr upwards in the ranks. With the benefit of hindsight, looks like a great pick. Shrug. Maybe somewhere around 15th overall.

 

[trenton1]

If Bergeron was a fluke I think it would be his attitude that would do him in, not his skillset (see Alexander Daigle 1995-2003). If Bergeron had those Daigle tendencies I believe he would have mailed in the AHL season this year instead of battling away as usual and growing as a player. With a trip down to the "A" I was a tad leery of a letdown in 2004-05 for Bergeron, but he passed with flying colors, IMO. This kid loves to compete and is pretty special. I have no need or want to compare him to anyone else because that doesn't really matter to me. But I do believe that Bergeron will be a huge factor on a team that hoists a cup or two someday...probably with the "new" Quebec Nordiques--but either way I will stand by the prediction.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

lol, that was my first post in liek 3 months i believe at least, that ive talked about Olesz being good haha.

that was my first post in 3 months too lol

 

[Russian_fanatic]

How does Fleury deserve being mentionned among the best in this draft? What exactly did he do? Get to the NHL? With PIT goalies, they might have aswell picked someone off the street, so Fleury getting to the NHL doesn't mean much. I've said this somewhere before, but Fleury somewhat reminds me of a Montoya. Gets selected high based on his WJC, and then people start realizing that he wasn't what they thought he was. Sure Fleury has potential, but quite a few players selected in the 3rd 4th etc. rounds who have tons of potential but that means less and less as time passes after they have been drafted if they don't do much to atleast show progress. Guys like Lehtonen/Ward/Toivonen are blowing away the competition anywhere they play, Lunqvist is showing steady improvement in Europe and seems on the path to stardome, while Fleury keeps on dissapointing. Sure his AHL team wasnt that great, but Ward's Lowell was even worst and he took them to the playoffs and even won a round while playing amazing under pressure even though he was a rookie. Toivonen and Lehtonen duked it out in the semi-finals aswell, while Lunqvist won the SEL championship playing against NHL talent. Until Fleury shows us SOMETHING, there is no reason to mention him among the best in the draft.

Fluery was dominating the NHL for a month until fatigue kicked in and everyone seems to forget that. He owned a .936 sv% and a 2.21 GAA. He kept up his magnificient play for a bit, but then he basically started getting owned. His teams defense was falling apart, and lets look at his total shots on goal, where he played the full game.

1)48
2)34
3)36
4)34
5)39
6)20
7)32
8)38
9)45
10)42
11)33
12)35
13)27
14)42
15)37
16)25
17)23
18)33
19)38

NO ROOKIE goaltender should have to face these type of shots. Fluery kept up with the pace for a bit, but he wore down. Do you really think Lehtonen would be able to do any better than Fleury? Fleury dominated the NHL longer, put up around the same numbers, tried keeping a weaker Pens team at around .500 (which he did for a bit). While Lehtonen gets credit for have 4 great games, where as Fleury had 10 or so.

Also if people want to judge goaltenders by 4 great games how about we looks at that Scott Clemmensen 4 games, he had a sv% of .952 and a GAA of 1.01. Although he did have 1 less win.

 

[Buffalo Stylee]

Of course, hindsight is 20:20, but that great group of 1985's is now getting old enough to look back and see how you would have done it differently. Grades are based on whether the player would have been picked a number of spots earlier or later if the draft were held today:

1. D. Phaneuf- 9 A+ (Cal)
2. J. Carter- 11 A+ (Phi)
3. M.A. Fleury- 1 B- (Pit)
4. E. Staal- 2 B- (Car)
5. N. Horton 3 B- (Fla)
6. N . Zherdev 4 B- (Col)
7. R. Suter 7 B (Nas)
8. R. Getzlaf 19 A+ (Ana)
9. T. Vanek 5 B- (Buf)
10. C. Perry 29 A+ (Ana)
11. M. Richards 24 A+ (Phi)
12. Z. Parise 17 A (NJ)
13. H. Jessiman 11 B- (NYR)
14. B. Coburn 8 C+ (Atl)
15. M. Michalek 6 C (SJ)
16. A. Kastitsyn 10 C+ (Mon)
17. M. Stuart 21 A (Bos)
18. D. Brown 13 C+ (LA)
19. E. Fehr 18 B (Was)
20. M.A. Pouliot 22 B+ (Edm)
21. R. Kesler 23 B+ (Van)
22. A. Stewart 25 B+ (Fla)
23. R. Nilsson 15 C+ (NYI)
24. B. Seabrook 14 F (Chi)
25. S. Belle 30 A (St.L)
26. B. Burns 20 C+ (Min)
27. S. Bernier 16 F (SJ)
28. P. Eaves 29 B (Ott)
NR B. Boyle 26 F (LA)
NR S. Tambellini 27 F (LA)

Great drafting by Philidelphia and Anaheim with 2 A+. Missed oportunities for SJ (F, C) and LA (2 F's and a C+). Inexcusable for teams like Toronto to not be in this draft.

That list is a joke. Plain and simple. Zherdev dropping?? The injured Horton being picked ahead of Vanek who had 42 goals in his first AHL season?? Tambellini getting an "F" ?? What for?? To give Horton the same score as Fluery, Vanek, Staal, and Zherdev is absurd.

My top 30 for 03
NOTE: edoted for my stupid placement of Getzlaf

1. Nikolai Zherdev
2. Dion Phaneuf
3. Eric Staal
4. Jeff Carter
5. Milan Michalek
6. Patrice Bergeron
7. Nathan Horton
8. Thomas Vanek
9. Dustin Brown
10. Zach Parise
11. Mike Richards
12. Ryan Suter
13. Marc-Andre Fleury
14. Shea Weber
15. Ryan Getzlaf
16. Brent Seabrooke
17. Mark Stuart
18. Braydon Coburn
19. Corey Perry
20. Ryan Kesler
21. Ryan Getzlaf
22. Dan Fritsche
23. Anthony Stewart
24. Eric Fehr
25. Marc-Antoine Poliout
26. Andrei Kostitsyn
27. Brent Burns
28. Patrick Eaves
29. Hugh Jessiman
30. Patrick O’Sullivan

This list also blows my mind. I would like to know what the hell Michalek did that was so great it warrants him being listed above not only Bergeron, but also Fluery, Vanek, and Parise.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

Am I the only one who thinks that Bergeron's great year was a bit of a fluke? Sure, based on performances thusfar, I would put him in the top 10 of 2003, but I can't shake the feeling that he's going to drop off a bit.
And, as a Sabres fan, I would like to say that I'd much rather have Vanek than Horton. I know that some of these players have had great junior years and stuff like that, but I cannot understand why Vanek is dropping as much as he is. He was second in the AHL in goals, which I think is more impressive than putting up great junior numbers.

This is what makes me upset. Many people here say Bergeron will be nothing special, mainly because he was a second rounder. If he was a top 10 pick, he would be praised like no tomorrow. His rookie season WAS NOT a fluke. He was one of the Bruins most consistent players. If he is not scoring, he is playing defensive or laying a hit on someone.

I'd also like to know how many non-Bruins fans have actually watched 10+ games of Bergeron.

 

[Blind Gardien]

This is what makes me upset. Many people here say Bergeron will be nothing special, mainly because he was a second rounder. If he was a top 10 pick, he would be praised like no tomorrow. His rookie season WAS NOT a fluke. He was one of the Bruins most consistent players. If he is not scoring, he is playing defensive or laying a hit on someone.

I'd also like to know how many non-Bruins fans have actually watched 10+ games of Bergeron.

I haven't read all this thread. I'm about as anti-Bruins as it gets. I've seen 10+ Bergeron games (more like 20+). I think the kid is great. He's worthy of top-10 status from that draft for sure. I can't believe I never noticed him much in junior. A big kudos to somebody on the B's scouting staff, that was a killer pick in an era when it is getting harder to make such killings.

 

[cassius]

Hop on the Carter bandwagon . . . .

 

[TheMistyStranger]

This is what makes me upset. Many people here say Bergeron will be nothing special, mainly because he was a second rounder. If he was a top 10 pick, he would be praised like no tomorrow. His rookie season WAS NOT a fluke. He was one of the Bruins most consistent players. If he is not scoring, he is playing defensive or laying a hit on someone.

I'd also like to know how many non-Bruins fans have actually watched 10+ games of Bergeron.

I saw about 10 B's games last time there was a season, and yes, he was consistent, and, at times, probably their best player on the ice. I'm not basing my previous statement on draft choice; we all know how telling those end up being. Like I said previously, it is just a feeling that I have. I was simply wondering if anybody else, perhaps with more viewings of Bergeron, had a similar hunch about his future performance. I think that he will tail off a bit, and at best slightly improve on his single season point total, but not enough in the long term to warrent being a top 10 pick in a retrospect 2003 draft.

All of that being said, I'm bigger on Bergeron than Nathan Horton, who I feel will never live up to his potential.

 

[The Vengabus]

In Soviet Russia, defence and hitting put numbers on the scoreboard.

So, um, you're supposed to score in hockey?

You'd take Bergeron because he can "hit" and is "proven defensively" and has heart and is a winner and is a good freakin Canadian kid over a player with elite skills like Zherdev. Would you take Morrison over Naslund? Fisher over Havlat? Kris bloody Draper over Sergei Federov? Oh bad example, Federov back checks, how can he possibly be Russian? Speaking of that, those Canadian immigration officials better check the true nationality of Artem Chubarov --he plays defence, and tries to hit people!

 

[Knighttown]

Holy Crap!! Over 10,000 views and 185 responses to this thread. That one touched a nerve especially with grumpy Kings fans

 

[AnThGrt]

Holy Crap!! Over 10,000 views and 185 responses to this thread. That one touched a nerve especially with grumpy Kings fans

Maybe we are upset for the lack of knowledge the people are posting on here with

 

[Peter James Bond]

Holy Crap!! Over 10,000 views and 185 responses to this thread. That one touched a nerve especially with grumpy Kings fans

In about 3-4 months from now, Dustin Brown, Jeff Tambellini, Brian Boyle and Konstantin Pushkarev will be outperforming more than half the players on your list.

You can still keep them off it, I don't care. I won't even be grumpy.

 

[nomorekids]

In about 3-4 months from now, Dustin Brown, Jeff Tambellini, Brian Boyle and Konstantin Pushkarev will be outperforming more than half the players on your list.

You can still keep them off it, I don't care. I won't even be grumpy.

Of course they will, I mean, it's easier to put up lofty numbers in the AHL than it is the NHL...

 

[Roger's Pancreas*]

Maybe we are upset for the lack of knowledge the people are posting on here with

Not me. I was impressed with how the Monarch's disappeared early.

 

[AnThGrt]

Not me. I was impressed with how the Monarch's disappeared early.

They left early so now they're prospects suck right shows your knowledge how about we look at the regular season we were #2 in the league. Playoffs Monarchs never can put it together hence the coach got fired. Dustin Brown if u watched would of won MVP had he played on how he was playing and they won the tournament. Tambs and Boyle are in college so they have nothing to do with the Monarchs loss in playoffs but if i may say they were MVP and carried there teams to win both there respectives tournaments. So next time before you go talking **** on teams or players get some prior knowledge what you are talking about

 

[McDonald19]

In about 3-4 months from now, Dustin Brown, Jeff Tambellini, Brian Boyle and Konstantin Pushkarev will be outperforming more than half the players on your list.

You can still keep them off it, I don't care. I won't even be grumpy.

Brown is going to have a good season...but the rest is just Homerism.

 

[Mixx]

Am I the only one who thinks that Bergeron's great year was a bit of a fluke? Sure, based on performances thusfar, I would put him in the top 10 of 2003, but I can't shake the feeling that he's going to drop off a bit.
And, as a Sabres fan, I would like to say that I'd much rather have Vanek than Horton. I know that some of these players have had great junior years and stuff like that, but I cannot understand why Vanek is dropping as much as he is. He was second in the AHL in goals, which I think is more impressive than putting up great junior numbers.

The only reason Vanek is over looked on here is because of the fact he didn't play major junior. The majority of people on here are canadian major junior fans. Vanek was a stud at Minnesota and proved he is a hell of a sniper as a rookie in the AHL last year. His first year he was second in the league in goals with 42 as a 21 year old. He has scored lots of goals at every level he has played. I am convinced if he was in the Dub most of you would rave about how talented he is. Just my .02

 

[KingPurpleDinosaur]

Brown is going to have a good season...but the rest is just Homerism.

honeslty, i can see why u think that way. and it's not surprising tambellini (bad sophmore year) and boyle (bad freshman year and half sophomore year) dropped in rankings. in fact, i think it' would be surprising if they didn't as they didn't improve dramatically as most other prospects did. but i think pushkarev is still doing well enough to keep an eye on. i don't kno if he'll break into the top 30's of any 2003 re-rankings in the next 2 years, but i think he'll definately be a name people remember in the next 5 years.

if boyle and tambellini keep up the good work (both ended this year strong), they should jump right back into the spotlight. but right now they kinda dont deserve that much props for what they have done since the draft.

 

[AnThGrt]

honeslty, i can see why u think that way. and it's not surprising tambellini (bad sophmore year) and boyle (bad freshman year and half sophomore year) dropped in rankings. in fact, i think it' would be surprising if they didn't as they didn't improve dramatically as most other prospects did. but i think pushkarev is still doing well enough to keep an eye on. i don't kno if he'll break into the top 30's of any 2003 re-rankings in the next 2 years, but i think he'll definately be a name people remember in the next 5 years.

if boyle and tambellini keep up the good work (both ended this year strong), they should jump right back into the spotlight. but right now they kinda dont deserve that much props for what they have done since the draft.

Take the circumstances into consideration too.... Tambs was injured all sophmore season and through most of this year and still was top in the NCAA for pts playing with a broken wrist (You try shooting with a broken wrist). // As for Boyle up till this year he never got anytime or the chance to play he played 4th line if at all then this season he kept playing more and more till the end he got the #1 role and what did he do carry his team and win MVP

 

[TheMistyStranger]

The only reason Vanek is over looked on here is because of the fact he didn't play major junior. The majority of people on here are canadian major junior fans. Vanek was a stud at Minnesota and proved he is a hell of a sniper as a rookie in the AHL last year. His first year he was second in the league in goals with 42 as a 21 year old. He has scored lots of goals at every level he has played. I am convinced if he was in the Dub most of you would rave about how talented he is. Just my .02

That makes a lot of sense. I'm American, wish I was Canadian, but I try to at least browse through the various leagues, not just the one in my backyard. Sometimes I forget how little respect US Colleges tend to get with hockey fans. Maybe it's the shorter season

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

In Soviet Russia, defence and hitting put numbers on the scoreboard.

So, um, you're supposed to score in hockey?

You'd take Bergeron because he can "hit" and is "proven defensively" and has heart and is a winner and is a good freakin Canadian kid over a player with elite skills like Zherdev. Would you take Morrison over Naslund? Fisher over Havlat? Kris bloody Draper over Sergei Federov? Oh bad example, Federov back checks, how can he possibly be Russian? Speaking of that, those Canadian immigration officials better check the true nationality of Artem Chubarov --he plays defence, and tries to hit people!

Maybe if you had the reading ability of an adult you would understand my post. I said that hitting and playing defensive is better than scoring. I just said that when he doesn't score in a game, you can rely on him to play a defensive role. Also, I said nothing about nationalities. Oh that's right, you have problems reading posts.

 

[sveiglar]

i think bergie started to get respect after the show he put on at the WJC...i also think staal will turn out to be a much better scorer than bergeron, although i think PB will be the better two-way player.

This is a classic fall-back of posters who want to back a player who most would say is a notch below another player. "Oh, that guy may score more points, but my guy will be a better two-way player".

IMO Staal will be a better scorer and all-around player than Bergeron, and that is no knock on Patrice, who is one of my personal favourite young players.

 

[KingPurpleDinosaur]

Take the circumstances into consideration too.... Tambs was injured all sophmore season and through most of this year and still was top in the NCAA for pts playing with a broken wrist (You try shooting with a broken wrist). // As for Boyle up till this year he never got anytime or the chance to play he played 4th line if at all then this season he kept playing more and more till the end he got the #1 role and what did he do carry his team and win MVP

ya, circumstances are fine and dandy, but it doesn't help their value. there were many prospects who gained value over the course of the last 2 years, so why shouldn't they be ranked hire then tambellini and boyle. sure, another 2 years down the line its goin to change again, but from wat we've seen up til now, tambellini and boyle have both lost value by not gaining value.

again, this isn't to say that they are "worse" per say, just that in comparative value, there are a lota really good picks that came up and shined in 2003.