Pittsburgh Penguins Prospects Thread

[CheckingLineCenter]

That is my biggest issue with the Lauzon (and Hall) picks. Prospects bust all the time, even the so-called "high ceiling" ones. But you're already setting yourself a low bar if you're picking guys high who even if they reach their best case scenario are bottom pairing/bottom six forwards.

IMO, you draft a player based on the assumption of him reaching his ultimate upside/ceiling. If said upside/ceiling is very low, you don't pick him high. You shouldn't be trying to land the next Robert Bortuzzo/Deryk Engeland with a high pick.

I agree. But I also think there’s logic behind going after a lower ceiling guy in Lauzon if the scouting staff believes he’s a lock to be an NHLer and meet that ceiling. Pens have their stars, need young dmen fast and he had a “safe” skillset and was older. I bet they thought he could beat the other defensemen on the board to the NHL. Again not my optimal strategy, but I understand it.

A little concerning they were comfortable doing that at #31, but once you’re in the late 2nd round of what looks like a shitty draft on paper — I don’t think it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. I wouldn’t have done it, but hey.

Now the question of if the staff targeted the right player to execute that strategy with is clearly up for debate. Obviously with his injuries they didn’t, but had he not been injured and is playing in the AHL right now are we all signing a different tune? Who knows.

 

[FreeBobbyFarnham]

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

D’Orio is having a nice season since the trade. 7-0 with a 1.86 GAA and .917 save%. Might turn out to be the best of the 3 signings that camp. Definitely has caught my interest and will be looking how he does in the AHL next season.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

I agree. But I also think there’s logic behind going after a lower ceiling guy in Lauzon if the scouting staff believes he’s a lock to be an NHLer and meet that ceiling. Pens have their stars, need young dmen fast and he had a “safe” skillset and was older. I bet they thought he could beat the other defensemen on the board to the NHL. Again not my optimal strategy, but I understand it.

A little concerning they were comfortable doing that at #31, but once you’re in the late 2nd round of what looks like a ****ty draft on paper — I don’t think it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. I wouldn’t have done it, but hey.

Now the question of if the staff targeted the right player to execute that strategy with is clearly up for debate. Obviously with his injuries they didn’t, but had he not been injured and is playing in the AHL right now are we all signing a different tune? Who knows.

I agree, hard to rip on the pick when injury is the reason he has been a bust. Will never know what could of happened with his development.

 

[Peat]

I agree. But I also think there’s logic behind going after a lower ceiling guy in Lauzon if the scouting staff believes he’s a lock to be an NHLer and meet that ceiling. Pens have their stars, need young dmen fast and he had a “safe” skillset and was older. I bet they thought he could beat the other defensemen on the board to the NHL. Again not my optimal strategy, but I understand it.

A little concerning they were comfortable doing that at #31, but once you’re in the late 2nd round of what looks like a ****ty draft on paper — I don’t think it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. I wouldn’t have done it, but hey.

Now the question of if the staff targeted the right player to execute that strategy with is clearly up for debate. Obviously with his injuries they didn’t, but had he not been injured and is playing in the AHL right now are we all signing a different tune? Who knows.

I'm down with the logic in general - I think Hallander's a great case of it - but with Lauzon they biffed it. Maybe we would have been wowed by a great +1 season and everything would have gone great, but I'd be far happier gambling on the guy who has shown it vs the guy who might.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

I'm down with the logic in general - I think Hallander's a great case of it - but with Lauzon they biffed it. Maybe we would have been wowed by a great +1 season and everything would have gone great, but I'd be far happier gambling on the guy who has shown it vs the guy who might.

Yeah I agree. What I’m getting at is that while I didnt and still don’t like that pick—I do understand what they were trying to do.

And I guess I’m a slightly more relieved/encouraged that the guy they targeted with that strategy in Lauzon was a tremendous skater. At least our staff values speed and mobility in their blueline prospects; not just some grit and being big and strong. Idk, I guess that’s a silver lining.

When you say you’d be happier with a gamble on someone who’s “shown it” you’re referring to scoring right?

 

[Peat]

Yeah I agree. What I’m getting at is that while I didnt and still don’t like that pick—I do understand what they were trying to do.

And I guess I’m a slightly more relieved/encouraged that the guy they targeted with that strategy in Lauzon was a tremendous skater. At least our staff values speed and mobility in their blueline prospects; not just some grit and being big and strong. Idk, I guess that’s a silver lining.

When you say you’d be happier with a gamble on someone who’s “shown it” you’re referring to scoring right?

Yup. Points have too high a correlation with making the show, even for majorly defensive players.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Out of our top prospects (the guys who’d have some decent trade value)— who do you want to give up the least in a deal? And who are you most okay with losing out of that group?

For me— really want to keep Filip Hallander.

I’m okay with dealing Addison. Mainly because I think he’s well regarded and the return would be damn good.

 

[Peat]

Out of our top prospects (the guys who’d have some decent trade value)— who do you want to give up the least in a deal? And who are you most okay with losing out of that group?

For me— really want to keep Filip Hallander.

I’m okay with dealing Addison. Mainly because I think he’s well regarded and the return would be damn good.

Really not sure. Addison is simultaneously the one I want to lose least as he's the most irreplaceable in the system and the one I mind losing least because I think he could be quite a way off while there's guys like Hallander who could be ready super quickly.

But one of those two.

 

[steelcityassault]

Well we know they won't be trading Bjork or Bellerive

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Well we know they won't be trading Bjork or Bellerive

The Killer Bs

 

[Clare2904]

 

[Jacob]

No pressure Booger but we need a Rust-esque stretch run and playoff performance from ya or you’re history.

 

[wej20]

Release the Blugers!

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Alert me when he plays. And if he gets meaningful ice time.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Really not sure. Addison is simultaneously the one I want to lose least as he's the most irreplaceable in the system and the one I mind losing least because I think he could be quite a way off while there's guys like Hallander who could be ready super quickly.

But one of those two.

Idk. I think that can be a dangerous way of thinking about prospects. Maybe Addison arrives earlier than expected or Hollander never does. Maybe Addison arrives at a pivotal time and plays a key role. If they think he’s a bust then by all means sell now but even at this point in the era I’m not a fan of prioritizing prospects they think will be in the nhl earlier. Sometimes the “safer” decision is just the wrong one.

Iirc they expected Bjorkvist to be nhl ready fairly quickly and now he’s 3 years into his college career. It was a reason they picked him but right now it’s at least 3 years of college and however much AHL time if he ever makes the nhl.

 

[KIRK]

Alert me when he plays. And if he gets meaningful ice time.

 

[Peat]

Idk. I think that can be a dangerous way of thinking about prospects. Maybe Addison arrives earlier than expected or Hollander never does. Maybe Addison arrives at a pivotal time and plays a key role. If they think he’s a bust then by all means sell now but even at this point in the era I’m not a fan of prioritizing prospects they think will be in the nhl earlier. Sometimes the “safer” decision is just the wrong one.

Iirc they expected Bjorkvist to be nhl ready fairly quickly and now he’s 3 years into his college career. It was a reason they picked him but right now it’s at least 3 years of college and however much AHL time if he ever makes the nhl.

Not necessarily disagreeing but how else do you pick between prospects in terms of who's more and less expendable as a trade asset?

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

Could he be the answer to our 3C problem? He is really lighting it up lately after a slow start. 4th in goals in the AHL and he plays a good overall game. I always thought 3C was his potential and just wondering if he has developed enough to be ready for that? Do you think the Pens would give him a 5 game stretch putting Brassard as a LW on one of the lines and seeing if Blueger could do well with Pearson and Kessel? Worth a shot to see if we could fix the 3C spot in house first. I still think the Pens will look for a 3C but 4 goals and 8 points in last 4 games should earn you a call up.

I wonder how Blueger’s numbers compare to what Sprong had in the same amount of games last year at this time? The big difference is Blueger plays a two way game and puts up those numbers. He seems to be getting better each year and his stock seems to be rising. Posters that watch WBS games can you give us some insight on how Blueger has been developing?

 

[Peat]

Could he be the answer to our 3C problem? He is really lighting it up lately after a slow start. 4th in goals in the AHL and he plays a good overall game. I always thought 3C was his potential and just wondering if he has developed enough to be ready for that? Do you think the Pens would give him a 5 game stretch putting Brassard as a LW on one of the lines and seeing if Blueger could do well with Pearson and Kessel? Worth a shot to see if we could fix the 3C spot in house first. I still think the Pens will look for a 3C but 4 goals and 8 points in last 4 games should earn you a call up.

I wonder how Blueger’s numbers compare to what Sprong had in the same amount of games last year at this time? The big difference is Blueger plays a two way game and puts up those numbers. He seems to be getting better each year and his stock seems to be rising. Posters that watch WBS games can you give us some insight on how Blueger has been developing?

Going from memory, the numbers are pretty similar for him and Sprong at this point last year - I think Sprong was maybe a tad ahead.

The problem is it would be quite the gamble to go with him at 3C no matter what he shows now. What if he gets a run of games, puts up a bunch of points, but its all adrenaline and when it wears off he's not good enough? I'm not particularly betting on that being the case, but I'm not too taken with betting that its definitely not the case either.

But then maybe they're thinking of gambling on it anyway.

 

[td_ice]

When there's something strange, and it don't look good.......who ya gonna call??

TEDDY BLUEGER!

Can't wait to see what the kid's got.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Not necessarily disagreeing but how else do you pick between prospects in terms of who's more and less expendable as a trade asset?

Assuming equal returns. A combination of ceiling and most likely to succeed. Maybe you screw up there but I’d expect it to be more successful. Particularly now when more players are getting into the league younger and smaller. They’ve gotten some time to track any progress those two are making and get more familiar with negatives.

 

[Jacob]

Could he be the answer to our 3C problem? He is really lighting it up lately after a slow start. 4th in goals in the AHL and he plays a good overall game. I always thought 3C was his potential and just wondering if he has developed enough to be ready for that? Do you think the Pens would give him a 5 game stretch putting Brassard as a LW on one of the lines and seeing if Blueger could do well with Pearson and Kessel? Worth a shot to see if we could fix the 3C spot in house first. I still think the Pens will look for a 3C but 4 goals and 8 points in last 4 games should earn you a call up.

I wonder how Blueger’s numbers compare to what Sprong had in the same amount of games last year at this time? The big difference is Blueger plays a two way game and puts up those numbers. He seems to be getting better each year and his stock seems to be rising. Posters that watch WBS games can you give us some insight on how Blueger has been developing?

Blueger is 24, Sprong was 20.

 

[Peat]

When there's something strange, and it don't look good.......who ya gonna call??

TEDDY BLUEGER!

Can't wait to see what the kid's got.

A great view from the press box.

Assuming equal returns. A combination of ceiling and most likely to succeed. Maybe you screw up there but I’d expect it to be more successful. Particularly now when more players are getting into the league younger and smaller. They’ve gotten some time to track any progress those two are making and get more familiar with negatives.

That makes sense but I can't help but think you can probably make an evaluation of how likely a guy is to make the show and how quickly in more or less the same breath as it's dealing with a lot of the same variables.

 

[wheelz87]

I'll get excited when he's in the lineup tomorrow instead of Wilson.