Ottawa Senators TSP Report: Top 10 Prospects Reports and Rankings

[Sweatred]

If Brown plays well in training camp it will be really hard to keep a D+4, top ten pick off the team. The optics would be worse than Spezza’s early demotion.

This year is supposed to be about development and rebuilding and if he outperforms but looses minutes to Aminisov types fan will scream.

 

[LastWordArmy]

This where the problem lies. "True" number one. Why must this man make the exact jump you would like for him. You can point to numbers and say "I don't know?" Or you can look further and make your mind up. I see the potential in Brown if you don't see it prepared to be amazed. Should be fun.

add: Also in hockey history there were few who scored 4 goals on their first game but it happened by a kid at 18 against us. The kid was novel in the way he scored so he does it better. Brown was taken 11th in that same draft. If you tell me that year no one can change hockey history you would have been wrong the first game of the season.

Anything is possible. Of course.

Its possible Nilsson and Anderson get 82 shutouts in a row and the sens dont give up a goal all season. Hockey history tells us that while its possible, its extremely unlikely.


As another example, I prefer to look at the probable or the plausible rather than saying its not impossible that someone breaks gretzkys record of 215 points in a season next year.

I dont think its probable that Brown goes from 42 pts in 56 AHL games to top line centre in one summer.

 

[LastWordArmy]

As an aside, doing this on top of working as a lawyer in Toronto is incredibly impressive.

Not sure what your practice entails, but if it’s anything even remotely corporate/Bay Street I’m going to assume you can just function on 2 hours of sleep a day.

Oh god. Id never due corporate/bay street.

I articled with a big firm and that was enough for me. My practice is with a boutique family firm where i bill about 1400 hours per year.

 

[Sensinitis]

Brown struggled in the AHL down the stretch. He had that great run that made his season with 21 points in 15 games in February the same time Batherson was tearing it up, then ended the season with 6 points in his last 17 games. He still needs time in the AHL, and with the Anisimov trade he will certainly be getting it.

Agreed, and that's completely fine. Brown was always supposed to be a project late-bloomer and at 21 yrs old, he'll be the #1 C for Belleville next season. Consistency is what will earn him a call-up after Anisimov and/or Pageau are traded at the deadline. He'll have his chance to show he belongs in those ~20 NHL games.

Brown becoming a center in the Johansen mold would be huge for us. I don't think that's overrating him to say that he can reach that level. That's the best comparable I was able to find in the NHL. Big, lanky, very skilled 1B center who's drive and consistency have been questioned.

 

[Mingus Dew]

Oh god. Id never due corporate/bay street.

I articled with a big firm and that was enough for me. My practice is with a boutique family firm where i bill about 1400 hours per year.

Jesus that sounds incredible. Good for you and awesome that you have time to pursue something like this while working as an attorney.

1400 hours a year is a dream. I’ll be decently close to that by the end of July.

 

[JD1]

It doesnt change that the team might have the worst group of centres in the nhl right now. Who else is in that debate? I can see Arizona being a debate. Are any other teams looking at that level? I dont see it.

Ok so you forgot White. That's kind of an important miss. I think you need to step back and re-set your thinking.

Go bottom up. Where do Pageau and Tierney rank as 3/4 Cs?

Where does Anisimov ranks as a 2C?

White as a 1C is clearly 31st. But you know, more ice, maturity, entering his prime....he may well end the year as the 31st ranked 1C...but I suspect the gap won't be what it is today.

I read your post about the PT gig .... good luck with it.

 

[JD1]

His point was the trade for Anisimov improved center depth but the group still remains one of the worst in the league. Adding White certainly changes the quality of our Centers, but does it push us out of the "probably the worst in the NHL" category? Honestly, I don't think it does, but at least there might be a debate with White.

I understood his point. Thanks

 

[LastWordArmy]

Ok so you forgot White. That's kind of an important miss. I think you need to step back and re-set your thinking.

Go bottom up. Where do Pageau and Tierney rank as 3/4 Cs?

Where does Anisimov ranks as a 2C?

White as a 1C is clearly 31st. But you know, more ice, maturity, entering his prime....he may well end the year as the 31st ranked 1C...but I suspect the gap won't be what it is today.

I read your post about the PT gig .... good luck with it.

The paragraph was about Brown's chances of making the team, and what to expect from him this year. So keep that in mind. You are clinging to one sentence in the paragraph that wasn't the point of the overall paragraph.

Now to your point.

Anisimov is probably in the bottom 10 of second line centre options to be honest, I haven't gone team by team through the whole league, as it is just one line in a paragraph about a different topic, in a 5000 word article. It isn't the main focus of the paragraph let alone the article. That said, off the top of my head, he's probably in the bottom third of 2nd liners and he fits in better as a 3rd liner at this point in his career than as a 2nd liner.

When your #1 C is 31st, and your #2 is probably best off as a #3.... you have one of the worst centre groups in the league. That doesn't mean it will always be that way, but there is a reason that the general consensus is that the Sens are likely to be picking in the top 5 again next year, and the lack of quality centres is one of those reasons. I don't think there are many neutrals out there who would see the Sens centre group as anything more than one of the worst groups in the NHL right now. Honestly.

Your #1 and #2 Cs playing over their heads is what makes the overall group bad. Where Pageau and Tierney rank almost doesn't matter when you start off with the two most important positions (and the two with the most ice time) being close to the bottom of their groupings.

I think most rational fans see that too.

 

[Micklebot]

I understood his point. Thanks

Great. So if his point no longer stands once White is included, i am sure you must have a list of teams who Ottawa clearly has a better group of centers than because that's your issue right?

 

[MatchesMalone]

With CHL-NHL transfer rules, and players often choosing to do a couple years of college or stay in europe for a couple years post draft the number of players who are u20 and in the AHL is miniscule. We have maybe 5 a year? 10? Im not sure scoring in the AHL as a u20 is a good measure of elite prospect. Most players don't go there at such an age... elite or not.

Yeah I get that. Just saying, when it does happen, lock the player up in your fantasy keeper league immediately.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

Rules for what is a prospect is that the player must be under 50 games played (including playoff games) and under 25 years old.

Lajoie played 56 games last year.

The rule has to be consistent for all teams, in order to rank the pools later.

Out of curiosity if he played 7 games less, where would you have him?

 

[LastWordArmy]

Out of curiosity if he played 7 games less, where would you have him?

Hes around Balcers. Id probably debate him at 8 ahead of Balcers or 9 behind him.

He played in the NHL last year but i felt he got exposed defensively. He likely should have played in the AHL. I think he wasnt ready and he was on a weak team that couldnt shelter him either so that has to be taken into account, along with his age. He might still become a productive NHLer but hes a maybe and his ceiling isnt high so id say around Balcers.

 

[JD1]

Great. So if his point no longer stands once White is included, i am sure you must have a list of teams who Ottawa clearly has a better group of centers than because that's your issue right?

Actually no Micklebot....that was not my issue at all... my issue was that it is kind of hard to look for credibility in the hockey reporting world when you analyze a team and forget to include what most feel is the top C.

As I told you the other day on another subject.... you didn't get my point at all

I'll go out on a limb and say lately you seem to take a stance of wanting to challenge anything I post....and that's fine because that is what message boards are for....but please first try to understand my point of view before coming up with one for me and challenging me on that

For the record....

yes I think the Senators currently have the weakest centre depth

I do think it is human nature to double down on an error which makes stepping back, adding the player and rethinking it harder to do than if he was simply included in the initial analysis

And having read what the guy is trying to do on a PT basis I wished him well....and I meant it

 

[JD1]

The paragraph was about Brown's chances of making the team, and what to expect from him this year. So keep that in mind. You are clinging to one sentence in the paragraph that wasn't the point of the overall paragraph.

Now to your point.

Anisimov is probably in the bottom 10 of second line centre options to be honest, I haven't gone team by team through the whole league, as it is just one line in a paragraph about a different topic, in a 5000 word article. It isn't the main focus of the paragraph let alone the article. That said, off the top of my head, he's probably in the bottom third of 2nd liners and he fits in better as a 3rd liner at this point in his career than as a 2nd liner.

When your #1 C is 31st, and your #2 is probably best off as a #3.... you have one of the worst centre groups in the league. That doesn't mean it will always be that way, but there is a reason that the general consensus is that the Sens are likely to be picking in the top 5 again next year, and the lack of quality centres is one of those reasons. I don't think there are many neutrals out there who would see the Sens centre group as anything more than one of the worst groups in the NHL right now. Honestly.

Your #1 and #2 Cs playing over their heads is what makes the overall group bad. Where Pageau and Tierney rank almost doesn't matter when you start off with the two most important positions (and the two with the most ice time) being close to the bottom of their groupings.

I think most rational fans see that too.

Sorry. I quoted a post highlighting that specific sentence.

Apart from that miss...ya I think that's a pretty good article.

As for the centre debate....having a weak 1C is a killer. You need an upper end 1C to be successful. Right now we don't have that. Maybe with a break out year from White we can get out if that 31st 1C position. Maybe. But we're certainly not moving to the middle of the pack.

But with anisimov, pageau and Tierney in the 2, 3 and 4 slots in no particular order, its probably 40 minutes a night where we are even or close to it.

But the 1C is a killer

 

[LastWordArmy]

Actually no Micklebot....that was not my issue at all... my issue was that it is kind of hard to look for credibility in the hockey reporting world when you analyze a team and forget to include what most feel is the top C.

As I told you the other day on another subject.... you didn't get my point at all

I'll go out on a limb and say lately you seem to take a stance of wanting to challenge anything I post....and that's fine because that is what message boards are for....but please first try to understand my point of view before coming up with one for me and challenging me on that

For the record....

yes I think the Senators currently have the weakest centre depth

I do think it is human nature to double down on an error which makes stepping back, adding the player and rethinking it harder to do than if he was simply included in the initial analysis

And having read what the guy is trying to do on a PT basis I wished him well....and I meant it

I agree that most people double-down on the error, and I am guilty of this at times as well.

That said, I don't think that is the case here.

1) Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my conclusion that it will be tough for Brown to make the Sens if the team is healthy. He still needs AHL time, and given where I think the Sens will finish this season, and what things will look like come February, I think his best bet is a call-up after Anisimov and/or Pageau are traded at the deadline.

2)Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my view that the Senators centre depth is amongst the weakest in the league. Even after adding him, I'm still coming to the same conclusion on that (even though it wasn't really the point of that paragraph). You seem to agree on that too.

Glad we are on the same page, and I'll try not to leave out a key player in future posts. Still not sure what type of brain fart i did to leave White out, but obviously I know I was wrong.

 

[JD1]

I agree that most people double-down on the error, and I am guilty of this at times as well.

That said, I don't think that is the case here.

1) Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my conclusion that it will be tough for Brown to make the Sens if the team is healthy. He still needs AHL time, and given where I think the Sens will finish this season, and what things will look like come February, I think his best bet is a call-up after Anisimov and/or Pageau are traded at the deadline.

2)Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my view that the Senators centre depth is amongst the weakest in the league. Even after adding him, I'm still coming to the same conclusion on that (even though it wasn't really the point of that paragraph). You seem to agree on that too.

Glad we are on the same page, and I'll try not to leave out a key player in future posts. Still not sure what type of brain fart i did to leave White out, but obviously I know I was wrong.

I agree that most people double-down on the error, and I am guilty of this at times as well.

That said, I don't think that is the case here.

1) Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my conclusion that it will be tough for Brown to make the Sens if the team is healthy. He still needs AHL time, and given where I think the Sens will finish this season, and what things will look like come February, I think his best bet is a call-up after Anisimov and/or Pageau are traded at the deadline.

2)Adding White to the lineup doesn't change my view that the Senators centre depth is amongst the weakest in the league. Even after adding him, I'm still coming to the same conclusion on that (even though it wasn't really the point of that paragraph). You seem to agree on that too.

Glad we are on the same page, and I'll try not to leave out a key player in future posts. Still not sure what type of brain fart i did to leave White out, but obviously I know I was wrong.

I think adding White in, or really acquiring Anisimov, makes it harder for Brown. Another 1/2 season of ripening should be enough for him. I like him and I'm really pulling for him. The Senators need him to move in to that 1C role.

 

[MatchesMalone]

I can distinctly remember making the same mistake some posters in this thread are making, regarding the definition of "depth" and looking at it purely as volume of quality players, versus accounting for higher-end players.

It was the start of the 2012 playoffs. I was arguing with my dad about St. Louis vs LA's forwars depth. To me, St. Louis had a ton of quality "depth". Six solid top six forwards and ten top nine forwards. Whereas LA only had five obvious top six forwards, and eight quality top nine forwards.

Needless to say, I learned my lesson in a big way that spring. Of St. Louis' top six forwards, only maybe two of them were legit first line forwards, if any. Whereas LA had three high-end, difference-maker centers.

As for the Logan Brown thing, I'm already at a loss as to how we're going to get quality ice time for all of these good centers we have (not sarcasm, we have four very solid centers), so I don't see how Brown fits. Why not give him one more full season in the AHL - he'll still be the first callup, and as much as I hate it, Pageau may be gone at the deadline. Let him show he can be truly dominant and put up better than a point per game down there.

 

[Micklebot]

Actually no Micklebot....that was not my issue at all... my issue was that it is kind of hard to look for credibility in the hockey reporting world when you analyze a team and forget to include what most feel is the top C.

As I told you the other day on another subject.... you didn't get my point at all

I'll go out on a limb and say lately you seem to take a stance of wanting to challenge anything I post....and that's fine because that is what message boards are for....but please first try to understand my point of view before coming up with one for me and challenging me on that

For the record....

yes I think the Senators currently have the weakest centre depth

I do think it is human nature to double down on an error which makes stepping back, adding the player and rethinking it harder to do than if he was simply included in the initial analysis

And having read what the guy is trying to do on a PT basis I wished him well....and I meant it

So he made an error, admitted and corrected it, said he still feels his point stands, to which you are now agreeing that his point did still stand, but you still initially felt it necessary to question him on it? And I'm the one going out of the way to challenge things that doing need challenging? Ok then...

 

[JD1]

So he made an error, admitted and corrected it, said he still feels his point stands, to which you are now agreeing that his point did still stand, but you still initially felt it necessary to question him on it? And I'm the one going out of the way to challenge things that doing need challenging? Ok then...

I am trying really hard to be polite here and in the spirit of
1. A thread on the state of the board and a general sense of folks trying to be nicer in here
2. You being a mod

I'm not going to tell you what I think

Why don't you rewind and start reading the thread from the beginning?

let's just leave it shall we

 

[MatchesMalone]

I'm really not a fan of the whole "line-position" formula for describing players/potential, e.g. third line center, second pair defenseman.

I get that it is just the way things are done and always have been done. And I don't expect I'm going to change the paradigm on my own, but I'm hopeful that I can at least plant the seeds in some people's heads.

Hockey is way to complicated a sport for this simplistic line-position structure. For starters, when assessing a prospect's potential, even assuming we are projecting a player for his prime, who knows what that player's situation will be when they're 24 or 27. At 24 they could be playing mostly on a weak team's top line, and then at 27 they've signed as a UFA with a powerhouse and play on the second and third lines.

And that leads me to my next point, within a single season and even a single game, coaches juggle line combinations. You might say "well I just mean they will play mostly on the second line" but meh - for one thing, a quick look at Dobbers line combination tool will show that players tend to play on a lot of different line combinations throughout the season, and often the difference in percentages between their top few most common line combinations isn't that big. For another thing, it is often difficult to distinguish which is a team's first from second, or second from third line.

And then perhaps the most important point: the line-position formula doesn't account for special teams. The Sens center situation this season is the most perfect counter-example I could have imagined. It is impossible to try to predict right now who will fit where, and that is precisely because there won't be a discernible answer. At even strength they will be bounced all over the place depending on performance, opponents and line-matching, and all four will see regular minutes on both special teams, and those likewise will vary based on performance and situations.

I suppose if I'm giving the line-position formula the most charitable understanding, then it would really just mean ranking the centers 1-4 by ice time, but the problem is that's not what most fans think when they hear this.

So what is the alternative? Some may have noticed I used a minute range formula (I've somewhat arbitrarily decided to use a three minute range). So for example, I might say MacKinnon is a 20-23 minute center; he is occasionally over or under but generally in that range.

Looking at the Sens centers this year, I would predict Pageau and Tierney are 15-18 minute centers, White will be 16-19, and Anisimov will be 14-17. I expect their ice time to rank: White, Tierney, Pageau, Anisimov. But that doesn't mean Anisimov is a fourth line center. He'll likely play mostly on a scoring line at even strength.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Ok so you forgot White. That's kind of an important miss. I think you need to step back and re-set your thinking.

Go bottom up. Where do Pageau and Tierney rank as 3/4 Cs?

Where does Anisimov ranks as a 2C?

White as a 1C is clearly 31st. But you know, more ice, maturity, entering his prime....he may well end the year as the 31st ranked 1C...but I suspect the gap won't be what it is today.

I read your post about the PT gig .... good luck with it.

Saying White is a 31st 1C is complimentary.. Especially in the context of C depth across teams. If you rank the Cs across the league would White be within shouting distance of 31. Many; maybe most teams have 2 better Cs .. I would guess a couple to a few could arguably have 3 better Cs . That means our C depth sucks and White does not prop it up that much. And I like White and am one of his biggest supporters here. Colin White is not a 1C on any other team , he may not be here. He is a 3C on most teams, maybe. Good chance he's on the wing on a lot of teams if you want to play him in the top 9.

 

[JD1]

Saying White is a 31st 1C is complimentary.. Especially in the context of C depth across teams. If you rank the Cs across the league would White be within shouting distance of 31. Many; maybe most teams have 2 better Cs .. I would guess a couple to a few could arguably have 3 better Cs . That means our C depth sucks and White does not prop it up that much. And I like White and am one of his biggest supporters here. Colin White is not a 1C on any other team , he may not be here. He is a 3C on most teams, maybe. Good chance he's on the wing on a lot of teams if you want to play him in the top 9.

I agree its complementary but I do think he's our 1C. I even said with a big year he'd close the gap on those above him but he'd still be 31st as a 1c.

I've also said I would not rush to extend him long term because I tend to agree with you that he could get pushed to the wing...meaning passed by other young Cs we have I'd we develop a strong top 9

But that said...at this point in time he's still our 1c. Brown making the team and sticking for the year would be a good thing. It would almost certainly mean one of White or Anisimov got pushed to the wing. And Brown will really need to rock camp to do that.

 

[bert]

Forgetting White doesn't change your analysis of the Sens centre depth? And you're looking for credibility in the hockey world? Really?

Saying you made a mistake and forgot him is one thing, suggesting doing so doesn't change the point...idk man

With or without White its still the worst group of centers in the NHL he isnt wrong about that. Not sure how that hurts his creditability.

 

[JD1]

With or without White its still the worst group of centers in the NHL he isnt wrong about that. Not sure how that hurts his creditability.

I could write an article stating Ford had the weakest collection of performance cars in the world and in my rundown of their roster not mention the Mustang. Not including the Mustang creates credibility issues with the analysis. I could rewrite the article, include the Mustang, yet still arrive at the same conclusion.

 

[bert]

I could write an article stating Ford had the weakest collection of performance cars in the world and in my rundown of their roster not mention the Mustang. Not including the Mustang creates credibility issues with the analysis. I could rewrite the article, include the Mustang, yet still arrive at the same conclusion.

Well thats not the same thing at all because its not correct or the right context as a comparable. His point was correct its a bad group of NHL centerman thats all he was getting at. He even apoligized for missing the player and said it was a stupid mistake following it up with fixing it. Attacking his credibility because you dont like the take, then making up some strange metaphor that isnt relatable in an attempt to prove your point and shame him is a pretty big over reaction. Sure is a strange way to go about things when he literally apologized and his point wasnt wrong. I appreciate the effort he made to make the list. He is making an honest attempt at making this his profession. I admire it.