Phantoms (AHL), Reading Royals (ECHL), NCAA, Jrs., Int'l, etc.

[wasup]

The issue i have with all these guys making these list, they are all guys that are professional writers journalists or bloggers with opinions . They have never played the game don't know the mechanics of it or the though processes behind it . But act like they are all knowledgeable hockey people , they are selling there knowledge which is next to none to people who are craving information . Heck i can guarantee they have not seen 90 percent of the people they are reporting about . I actually trust the Flyers scouts , development people , Hextall and Priors opinions about the prospects we have not some journalists write up on 31 different teams and trying to put together another uneducated list . Whether we are number 1 , 6, 12,21,31 on some guys list don't mean crap cause they don't know crap .
I'm having a bad day , came on here for a break and saw more pointless list . omg
Actually i trust our own lists and debate on here more ,at least we have 'some" hockey knowledge of our own prospects .

 

[LastWordArmy]

Good old Detroit. Hit on late round euro gems before anybody else scouted Europe properly and have had a top 10 prospect system ever since. Even though they have barely developed any impact talent in the last 15 years.

If you look at our previous years, we've been very harsh on Detroit, and have pointed out that they didn't do much from 2004 onwards in terms of drafting.

That said, their prospect group is legit now.

2016 Detroit was 17th
2017 Detroit was 21st

They had a big improvement over the last year... a great draft this year, Rasmussen scored at ES easing concerns that he was just a PP specialist, Hronek had a great rookie season as an AHL Dman, Chlowoski showed more in the WHL than he had in the NCAA the previous year. All of that bumped them a lot. But they haven't been someone we've automatically ranked top 10 on reputation.

 

[deadhead]

My mothers family are Swedish... albeit it has been 200 or so years since they left.

and while my Dad's family is Irish-Italian-French-Algerian his name Appleyard is an Anglo-Saxon name

Well the Swedish side will fit in, since there's a controversy among genetics over whether the 30% Anglo-Saxon contribution is Anglo-Saxon or a mix with Danes (who have a similar gene pool for obvious reasons, they were neighbors 1,500 years ago). And of course, Sweden is just a short Viking boat ride from Denmark.

But Irish-Italian-French-Algerian? That's a stretch!

 

[BernieParent]

TSP: 2018 NHL Organizational Prospect Rankings Top 10 -

Our prospects are ranked #6

I can get on board with this ranking.

 

[GapToothedWonder]

If you look at our previous years, we've been very harsh on Detroit, and have pointed out that they didn't do much from 2004 onwards in terms of drafting.

That said, their prospect group is legit now.

2016 Detroit was 17th
2017 Detroit was 21st

They had a big improvement over the last year... a great draft this year, Rasmussen scored at ES easing concerns that he was just a PP specialist, Hronek had a great rookie season as an AHL Dman, Chlowoski showed more in the WHL than he had in the NCAA the previous year. All of that bumped them a lot. But they haven't been someone we've automatically ranked top 10 on reputation.

It was a general statement not just directed at you guys. I don't know what your history is specifically. I still think they are rated a little high here but nothing out of control.

 

[Tripod]

I can get on board with this ranking.

Ironically, in the polls section of HF it's where we landed as well. Not bad considering we graduated Patrick, Sanheim, Hagg and Leier.

 

[BernieParent]

Ironically, in the polls section of HF it's where we landed as well. Not bad considering we graduated Patrick, Sanheim, Hagg and Leier.

Well, Patrick and Sanheim, for sure. I would add Morin's injury-related drop in ranking.

 

[Rebels57]

TSP: 2018 NHL Organizational Prospect Rankings Top 10 -

Our prospects are ranked #6

A lot more reasonable than that moron Pronman ranking us at 12

 

[wasup]

Bucci Mane‏Verified account @Buccigross 1h1 hour ago
More
My Top 6 Hobey Baker Pre-Season alphabetical Picks: Wade Allison Western Michigan Quinn Hughes Michigan Ryan Kufner Princeton Tanner Laczynski Ohio State Scott Perunovich Minn-Duluth Mike Veronneau Princeton
Our boys getting some Cawlidge Hackey love

 

[Jettany]

TSP: 2018 NHL Organizational Prospect Rankings Top 10 -

Our prospects are ranked #6

Do the islanders really have a better system then the flyers? I’ve seen them ranked as high as 4 as low as 20. Thoughts?

 

[deadhead]

These rankings are a bit meaningless, they'll always be skewed toward a few "name" picks, but the best farm systems, almost by definition, should be producing a steady flow of "unknowns" that become productive NHL players - anyone can produce a flow of stars picked in the top five.

 

[LastWordArmy]

These rankings are a bit meaningless, they'll always be skewed toward a few "name" picks, but the best farm systems, almost by definition, should be producing a steady flow of "unknowns" that become productive NHL players - anyone can produce a flow of stars picked in the top five.

I think we are talking about ranking two different things.

You want to rank the quality of the scouting staff and development coaches in an organization. That is a very hard thing to rank, but sure.... if someone wants to make those rankings sure. Its tough cause there is so much turnover when those staffs are really good (they get promotions to other organizations), or bad (they are fired). So ranking this can be an issue. Its also hard to seperate the natural talent (or lack there of) of a player and his coaching development, but I guess you could say that is for scouting to find. So much happens behind the scenes that its also hard to see and quantify.


What our rankings (and Pronman's, and the Sporting News), are trying to do is rank the overall amount of quality in a farm system. The total amount of impact that those prospects could have going forward. That isn't easy either, but its a lot more tangible and can be seen on the ice. And yes, drafting high really helps, no doubt about that. That said teams that draft low can do well (see St. Louis who are 7th for us, and 3rd for Pronman, and have rarely drafted higher than 20th). The Flyers are 6th for us, and they don't have high draftees in the system, (they do on the NHL team, but Patrick and Provorov are graduated and aren't considerations in our ranking).

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Bucci Mane‏Verified account @Buccigross 1h1 hour ago
More
My Top 6 Hobey Baker Pre-Season alphabetical Picks: Wade Allison Western Michigan Quinn Hughes Michigan Ryan Kufner Princeton Tanner Laczynski Ohio State Scott Perunovich Minn-Duluth Mike Veronneau Princeton
Our boys getting some Cawlidge Hackey love

Bucci knows his college hockey.

 

[deadhead]

What our rankings (and Pronman's, and the Sporting News), are trying to do is rank the overall amount of quality in a farm system. The total amount of impact that those prospects could have going forward. That isn't easy either, but its a lot more tangible and can be seen on the ice. And yes, drafting high really helps, no doubt about that. That said teams that draft low can do well (see St. Louis who are 7th for us, and 3rd for Pronman, and have rarely drafted higher than 20th). The Flyers are 6th for us, and they don't have high draftees in the system, (they do on the NHL team, but Patrick and Provorov are graduated and aren't considerations in our ranking).

Development is almost impossible to measure (how to separate good scouting from player development?), but overall productivity should be easy - expected v actual value.

That is, high picks have high expected value, and you can use draft trade charts or other proxies as a crude measure of draft value, then use the outcomes to see which organizations are producing more or less value than expected.

Problem is this takes 5-10 years, but you can produce a measure of draft value for say the last five years then compare the ranking of draft value with the rankings of farm system quality to identify the teams doing the best job. It'll at least give you a sense of who is doing a good job and who is simply reaping the benefits of being bad at the NHL level (any doofus could pick McDavid or Matthews).

 

[wasup]

Do the islanders really have a better system then the flyers? I’ve seen them ranked as high as 4 as low as 20. Thoughts?

Read my thoughts above i ain't just shitting ya .

 

[LastWordArmy]

Development is almost impossible to measure (how to separate good scouting from player development?), but overall productivity should be easy - expected v actual value.

That is, high picks have high expected value, and you can use draft trade charts or other proxies as a crude measure of draft value, then use the outcomes to see which organizations are producing more or less value than expected.

Problem is this takes 5-10 years, but you can produce a measure of draft value for say the last five years then compare the ranking of draft value with the rankings of farm system quality to identify the teams doing the best job. It'll at least give you a sense of who is doing a good job and who is simply reaping the benefits of being bad at the NHL level (any doofus could pick McDavid or Matthews).

What is the value if the people working those jobs 5 years ago are no longer working those jobs and in that organization?

How many AHL teams have the same coaching staff as 5 years ago?

How many scouts have changed organizations in 5 years, either through firings or promotions?

 

[LastWordArmy]

Do the islanders really have a better system then the flyers? I’ve seen them ranked as high as 4 as low as 20. Thoughts?

I don't know who has them at 20, but that seems crazy to me.

Lets go through this with a comparison to the Flyers (and i have the two systems close).

Hart gets the nod over Sorokin but not by much. Sorokin is a legit top 5 goalie prospect. Hart is our 2nd best goalie prospect.

Wahlstrom I have over Frost (flyers best forward)

Bellows and Farabee are really close, but I'll give a slight edge to Bellows.

Dobson i have over Myers

Morin I have over Wilde

Forward depth goes to the flyers easily (Allison, O'Brien, Lindblom, Ratcliffe) vs (Ho-Sang, Jenkins, Ishakov, Dal Colle)

Defensive depth goes to the Isles easily (Toews, Vande Sompel, Quennville, Aho) vs (Ginning, Friedman, Kalynuk, Hogberg).

Goalie depth Soderstrom and Skarek is a win over Lyon, Stolarz, etc...

So overall its close, I have to give it to the Isles though, slightly... the Dobson and Wahlstrom picks make a big difference. I had both as top 10 prospects pre-draft.

 

[deadhead]

What is the value if the people working those jobs 5 years ago are no longer working those jobs and in that organization?

How many AHL teams have the same coaching staff as 5 years ago?

How many scouts have changed organizations in 5 years, either through firings or promotions?

You could say the same about drafting then, since the people who made those drafts are probably gone? So then you're just ranking the last couple drafts in terms of hindsight.

Stable organizations tend to replace scouts and coaches with personnel of similar quality, it will be the bad organizations that have a lot of turnover, but until they get top executives who are competent, it won't make a difference. So noting the difference between expected value and current estimated value will identify the organizations that get the most "bang for their buck."

 

[Tripod]

@LastWordArmy welcome to our board and and dealing with someone who argues, just to argue.

 

[deadhead]

If we all agreed, why post or read, since you would already know what everyone is going to say, and therefore have no reason to read since you will learn nothing.

 

[LastWordArmy]

You could say the same about drafting then, since the people who made those drafts are probably gone? So then you're just ranking the last couple drafts in terms of hindsight.

Stable organizations tend to replace scouts and coaches with personnel of similar quality, it will be the bad organizations that have a lot of turnover, but until they get top executives who are competent, it won't make a difference. So noting the difference between expected value and current estimated value will identify the organizations that get the most "bang for their buck."

Is getting the most bang for the buck the most important thing.

Or is how much talent you have in your system important?

Do we want to know which teams have a lot of prospects that are going to help them improve in the near future? or do we want to know who drafted well with low picks? I think the total amount of talent is more important.

Yes it might be easy to draft McDavid or Dahlin or Matthews or Laine.... but 3 of those players are already GREAT in the NHL and are helping their teams, and the fourth is a good bet to be a great player.

What do we want to measure and why?

It was easy to draft Crosby and Malkin. The Penguins made the obvious pick in both instances. It set them up for a decade plus of success (as much as that doesn't please this board). So thats why its still important even if the picks are easy to make.

 

[Adtar02]

I don't know who has them at 20, but that seems crazy to me.

Lets go through this with a comparison to the Flyers (and i have the two systems close).

Hart gets the nod over Sorokin but not by much. Sorokin is a legit top 5 goalie prospect. Hart is our 2nd best goalie prospect.

Wahlstrom I have over Frost (flyers best forward)

Bellows and Farabee are really close, but I'll give a slight edge to Bellows.

Dobson i have over Myers

Morin I have over Wilde

Forward depth goes to the flyers easily (Allison, O'Brien, Lindblom, Ratcliffe) vs (Ho-Sang, Jenkins, Ishakov, Dal Colle)

Defensive depth goes to the Isles easily (Toews, Vande Sompel, Quennville, Aho) vs (Ginning, Friedman, Kalynuk, Hogberg).

Goalie depth Soderstrom and Skarek is a win over Lyon, Stolarz, etc...

So overall its close, I have to give it to the Isles though, slightly... the Dobson and Wahlstrom picks make a big difference. I had both as top 10 prospects pre-draft.

Not not sure I would put walhstrom over frost.

Sandstrom I believe is our second best goalie prospect. As well.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Not not sure I would put walhstrom over frost.

Sandstrom I believe is our second best goalie prospect. As well.

I'd still take Soderstrom before Sandstrom.

Frost had a great season, but no I wouldn't take him above Wahlstrom who I had as one of the top 10 picks in this draft. I don't think Frost has gotten to that level yet. There are still questions on him. I see a future 2nd line centre. I'm not sure i see a first liner there. Wahlstrom I could see a first line elite Sniper, good for 30-35 goals almost every year.

 

[Stizzle]

Defensive depth goes to the Isles easily (Toews, Vande Sompel, Quennville, Aho) vs (Ginning, Friedman, Kalynuk, Hogberg).

It does? NYI with a bunch of very small defensemen. DQ is 5'8, Aho is 5'10, Vande Sompel is 5'10 and didn't he play forward a bunch in the AHL last year? I'm not enamored with this group even a little.

Not that you probably give a crap about my rankings but I have Hogberg, Kalynuk, and Friedman as our 9th, 10th and 12th best prospects. Hogberg, in particular, I'd bet becomes an NHL regular.

Forward depth goes to the flyers easily (Allison, O'Brien, Lindblom, Ratcliffe) vs (Ho-Sang, Jenkins, Ishakov, Dal Colle)

This isn't just easily. This is a gigantic difference. Our forward depth is stronger than any prospect pool in the league. NYI's is putrid.

Ho-Sang and MDC are clearly not in there future plans. You didn't even mention Vorobyev and Laczynski for us. I have them ranked 5th and 6th in our prospect pool. Not to mention a recent 1st round pick in Rubtsov.

 

[Adtar02]

I'd still take Soderstrom before Sandstrom.

Frost had a great season, but no I wouldn't take him above Wahlstrom who I had as one of the top 10 picks in this draft. I don't think Frost has gotten to that level yet. There are still questions on him. I see a future 2nd line centre. I'm not sure i see a first liner there. Wahlstrom I could see a first line elite Sniper, good for 30-35 goals almost every year.

Not saying I wouldn’t take soderstrom before sandstrom just think he is better than Lyon and stolaz.

I see wahlStrom as someone who needs a frost to pot those 30-35 goals. I don’t see enough in the rest of his game other than his shot. And I liked farabee as a player more than whlstrom for the flyers to draft. Not saying ones right or wrong just giving an opinion. Not shocked that you have the islander up higher due your view on front end talent and the flyers have graduated a bunch of players.