The Athletic Pronman: Buffalo Sabres rank No. 3 in NHL Pipeline Rankings for 2023

[Fjordy]

Pronman

 

[allsilverdreams]

#3 Ahahahahahahahah
Azz clown.

 

[Archie Lee]

In the podcast about the top 8, Pronman explained that he really could have mixed his top 3 ranked teams in any order. Anaheim he thought ultimately had the most top end talent. Chicago has a good pool and they have the one under 23 player who might be generational. For the Sabres, he thought the overall depth was the best and called our pool “a murder’s row” of top prospects.

Tough crowd.

 

[Matt Ress]

He gave his reasons why on the podcast. NHL scouts still aren’t sold on him, because of his size and lack of elite traits, and they thought he had obvious issues in his brief NHL stint.

Just because he has a different opinion on a player doesn’t cause him to lose credibility - talk about being overly sensitive! Especially when his opinion is shared by plenty of professionals, and the player has proven nothing at the pro level.

I mean, a lot of the guys ahead of him haven't proven anything at the pro level either and most are further away with their own warts. Eh, everyone weighs prospects differently, like you said.

 

[TageGod]

Pronman is not a fan of short players or Sabre's would be #1.

 

[HOOats]

Tough crowd.

Eh, I don't really care if he has us 1 or 3 or 5. His analysis is just shallow and unimpressive. I get that he's doing essentially a "pop" version of scouting, but man there's just not a lot of substance. Maybe it's an ESL thing, but he recycles phrases and writes in cliches to the point where meaning is lost.

I wish more people would use a baseball-style scouting rubric. Pronman may have cribbed the five tools he scores - skating, puck skills, hockey sense, compete, shot - from baseball's classic five tools - hitting, power, running, fielding, throwing. But his use of "below NHL average, above NHL average" is so bad in comparison to the classic 20-80 baseball scale (50 being average). The only reason to not use letter or number grades is to cover lack of intel with vagueness. Also, baseball uses the helpful "current grade/potential grade" format, which colors in the picture of a player's development arc. For example he has Neuchev's skating as "below NHL average." Does that mean he projects Neuchev to be a below average NHL skater in his prime? That's silly. He probably grades as a 30/50+ skater (current/potential).

 

[TageGod]

Eh, I don't really care if he has us 1 or 3 or 5. His analysis is just shallow and unimpressive. I get that he's doing essentially a "pop" version of scouting, but man there's just not a lot of substance. Maybe it's an ESL thing, but he recycles phrases and writes in cliches to the point where meaning is lost.

I wish more people would use a baseball-style scouting rubric. Pronman may have cribbed the five tools he scores - skating, puck skills, hockey sense, compete, shot - from baseball's classic five tools - hitting, power, running, fielding, throwing. But his use of "below NHL average, above NHL average" is so bad in comparison to the classic 20-80 baseball scale (50 being average). The only reason to not use letter or number grades is to cover lack of intel with vagueness. Also, baseball uses the helpful "current grade/potential grade" format, which colors in the picture of a player's development arc. For example he has Neuchev's skating as "below NHL average." Does that mean he projects Neuchev to be a below average NHL skater in his prime? That's silly. He probably grades as a 30/50+ skater (current/potential).

It is a lot of prospects though. Short of a time trial of every player in the league being used, with such a large quantity of players, there will be mistakes. Do we really think he knows much about Neuchev? The rankings have to be based on projection, as that is the whole point of prospect speak: projecting. Not everyone gets faster, smarter, and more skilled though.

 

[HOOats]

It is a lot of prospects though. Short of a time trial of every player in the league being used, with such a large quantity of players, there will be mistakes. Do we really think he knows much about Neuchev? The rankings have to be based on projection, as that is the whole point of prospect speak: projecting. Not everyone gets faster, smarter, and more skilled though.

Yes projection - an estimate or forecast of a future situation or trend based on a study of present ones. Stating where the prospect currently is vs. where they are projected to reach and the likelihood...is the whole point. There's a reason baseball notes "present/future," as it informs ETA and ceiling using the simple shorthand of four digits.

And I'm not sure "a lot of prospects" is a reasonable excuse. I'm expected to know a lot about thousands of different things where I work. Fangraphs has had one or two guys ranking 30+ prospects for all 30 MLB teams with great nuance and depth for a long time. But then again, most of them go on to work in MLB front offices, which I don't expect Pronman to ever do. Plus, not all scouting is in-person viewing. Plenty comes from critical reading of other scouts' reports, knowing their biases and preferences.

Pronman just ain't the right guy for the job I'm afraid.

PS This is what quality content looks like (and it's free). Eric Longenhagen did this for every team (51 Dodgers prospects with multiple thoughtful paragraphs here). If anyone can point me to this type of quality being done for the NHL, I'd love to see it.

Los Angeles Dodgers Top 51 Prospects

This system is one of the most talented in baseball.

blogs.fangraphs.com

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

It is a lot of prospects though. Short of a time trial of every player in the league being used, with such a large quantity of players, there will be mistakes. Do we really think he knows much about Neuchev? The rankings have to be based on projection, as that is the whole point of prospect speak: projecting. Not everyone gets faster, smarter, and more skilled though.

The format of the article, I’m assuming, is his choice. If he doesn’t have the ability to rank the top 20 prospects of each nhl team, then don’t. Is there honestly much difference in grades once you get beyond a certain point? Break it down in sub categories this bracket of teams don’t have 5 quality prospects, don’t research more than 5 guys. This bracket has 5-7 guys, research 5-7 guys. This is my top 3, have something significant to say about their pool.

Or put out vague, vanilla, uninspired, un insightful fluff pieces to impress the drunks at the bar so that local radio shows invite you on and then prepare yourself as needed… oh.

 

[old kummelweck]

Why do people care where the sabres prospects are ranked?

 

[5 Minute Major]

Would he be who he was if he was drafted bt the Browns instead of the Patriots

Would the Patriots have won a SB without Brady?

 

[brian_griffin]

Would the Patriots have won a SB without Brady?

That's a good question. Brady and Belichick are in the Michael Jordan / Larry Bird tier of innate competitiveness. It's interesting to debate Belichick without Brady vs. Brady without Belichick. I firmly believe either would have sold both their own, and the other's grandmother into slavery to achieve what they collectively achieved (if they haven't already done so). I think they'd sell everyone's grandmother into slavery, come to think of it.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

Imagine thinking that Levi had "obvious" issues in his 7 game stint. The only issue is that he wasn't a Sabre all season where we would have easily made the playoffs. This list is f***ING GARBAGE.

 

[Gras]

That's a good question. Brady and Belichick are in the Michael Jordan / Larry Bird tier of innate competitiveness. It's interesting to debate Belichick without Brady vs. Brady without Belichick. I firmly believe either would have sold both their own, and the other's grandmother into slavery to achieve what they collectively achieved (if they haven't already done so). I think they'd sell everyone's grandmother into slavery, come to think of it.

Its interesting to think about since Brady proved he could win without Belichik in Tampa, but would Brady have had the career he did if he came up under a different coach.

 

[Deep Blue Metallic]

That's a good question. Brady and Belichick are in the Michael Jordan / Larry Bird tier of innate competitiveness. It's interesting to debate Belichick without Brady vs. Brady without Belichick. I firmly believe either would have sold both their own, and the other's grandmother into slavery to achieve what they collectively achieved (if they haven't already done so). I think they'd sell everyone's grandmother into slavery, come to think of it.

The famous misquote attributed to legendary Liverpool manager Bill Shankly applies here. We underestimate how insanely driven the most successful people have to be to consistently excel.

"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death. It is much more important than that."

 

[Chainshot]

i enjoy his write ups and articles, but they are just for entertainment. The idea that one person could have such a good understanding of every team’s U23 talent…to a degree he could rank them.

Yeah, it's hard to rank 800 guys.

 

[Old Navy Goat]

I just find it amusing how he seemingly is trying to make a concerted effort to veer away from his usual spinny spinny skate fast to nowhere but look good doing it prospects to more align with how NHL teams draft

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

I just find it amusing how he seemingly is trying to make a concerted effort to veer away from his usual spinny spinny skate fast to nowhere but look good doing it prospects to more align with how NHL teams draft

He clearly seems to have more access to NHL team scouts these days…he sure mentions it a lot lately .

I think he even said their feedback has caused him to change the way he ranks defensemen, which sounds like someone who isn’t set in their ways. Probably a good trait for a job adjacent to journalism.

 

[toomuchsauce]

I like Pronman and Wheeler. As a hockey fan who enjoys the draft and following our prospects, it is great to have the content they provide. Do I agree with them on all of their rankings? Of course not. It would be some kind of amazing if a person who covers prospects across all teams and leagues could nail the general consensus on prospect rankings that an NHL team's fanbase has. I don't think this is something to be taken too seriously. The good news is that we are loaded with good young players.

I haven't listened to his comments on the Sabres yet, so haven't heard what he said about Levi. I did, though, hear his earlier comments on Calgary's goalie prospect Dustin Wolf. He actually referenced Levi in these comments and, I'm paraphrasing, said that there are two sets of opinions on Wolf and Levi: There is the public/local-media/fan opinion that these goalies are NHL #1's in waiting, and then there is the inside the NHL opinion that there is real uncertainty about whether they are true #1 NHL goalies.

of course, because these guys are not 6'6". There will always be "insiders" who will tell you that an undersized prospect is actually bad. it's the easiest opinion in the world to have.

the real issue with them is that they're goalies, and when it comes to goalies, nobody knows anything.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Imagine thinking that Levi had "obvious" issues in his 7 game stint. The only issue is that he wasn't a Sabre all season where we would have easily made the playoffs. This list is f***ING GARBAGE.

He clearly gave up a lot of rebounds. Sure that's an obvious issue, not issueS. Both the good and bad parts of his game are subject to a rather small sample size.

I saw enough to think Levi will be an NHL goalie.

 

[toddkaz]

scouts are notoriously stupid

Scouts led to the greatest athlete of all time being picked in the 6th round, 199th overall. That says everything you need to see about dumb scouts

Scouts got something wrong but the armchair quarterbacks knew better. Said no one ever.

Just because scouts get something wrong it doesn't make them stupid. No one on this planet saw it differently

Pavel Datsyuk was drafted 171st overall. Show me someone on this planet that had him as a first round talent? Or how about Zetterberg at 210.

Scouts get it wrong or players develop past expectations? Its not always clear cut.

 

[debaser66]

Yeah, it's hard to rank 800 guys.

Yeah it is, but than again isnt this his fulltime job?
If some people around here would have their whole time dedicated to hockey I would wonder what kind of lists they would come up with, like yourself Sir!

 

[Diaspora]

Eh, I don't really care if he has us 1 or 3 or 5. His analysis is just shallow and unimpressive. I get that he's doing essentially a "pop" version of scouting, but man there's just not a lot of substance. Maybe it's an ESL thing, but he recycles phrases and writes in cliches to the point where meaning is lost.

I wish more people would use a baseball-style scouting rubric. Pronman may have cribbed the five tools he scores - skating, puck skills, hockey sense, compete, shot - from baseball's classic five tools - hitting, power, running, fielding, throwing. But his use of "below NHL average, above NHL average" is so bad in comparison to the classic 20-80 baseball scale (50 being average). The only reason to not use letter or number grades is to cover lack of intel with vagueness. Also, baseball uses the helpful "current grade/potential grade" format, which colors in the picture of a player's development arc. For example he has Neuchev's skating as "below NHL average." Does that mean he projects Neuchev to be a below average NHL skater in his prime? That's silly. He probably grades as a 30/50+ skater (current/potential).

IIRC, he used to do that 20-80 thing but walked away from it. Unless you have a calibrated measuring stick with ample, clean, objective data, precise scores are pseudoscience -- i.e., bullshit. He's truthfully displaying vagueness as vagueness.

He's just one guy who watches a lot of dev league hockey and shares his notes for entertainment. He covers all of the US, Canada, and Eurasia, so there are gaps. He's not a scout, and he's no authority. He's often wrong. I can relate.

But I'd never hear much about other teams' prospect pools if I didn't read his stuff, so he's still worth following, imo.

 

[Chainshot]

Yeah it is, but than again isnt this his fulltime job?
If some people around here would have their whole time dedicated to hockey I would wonder what kind of lists they would come up with, like yourself Sir!

There are some teams that I would rather gouge out my eyes than try to find and rank 25 players under 23. The top teams are fun. Teams I root for are interesting. But teams I straight up don't like or who have no prospect depth?

 

[stokes84]

Why do people care where the sabres prospects are ranked?

Because you are on a discussion forum called hockeys future