Proof HF is out to lunch on prospect grading

[Canuck Luck]

Today they released the Canucks top 20 prospects.
While the list itself in order of 1-20 was not overly bad until it reached the last 5ish prospects, the ratings were just out right horrible and the reasoning for some were even worse!

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/13243/hodgson_still_tops_in_vancouver_prospect_pool/

3. (7) Chris Tanev, D, 6.5B
Acquired as free agent, May 31st, 2010

Like Hodgson, Tanev gained some valuable NHL experience in 2010-11, with 29 regular season and five playoff games, and did not look out of place. In Manitoba, he registered one goal and eight assists in 39 regular season games, and was plus-16. In 14 playoff games, he notched a goal and two helpers.

Tanev is not spectacular in any regard, but he is always smart with the puck and makes great decisions in all situations. He projects as a third pairing defenseman in the NHL and his solid game and hockey smarts indicate he is a sure bet to reach that potential.

Now HF describes a 6.5 defense-man to be a 5-6 defense-man at best. Is it just me or was Tanev not already just that last season? If not worse they put a B as in he may drop one grade to a #7 dman. Tanev has definately already been a #7 dman in his rookie year so are they saying he won't improve at all from his rookie year and we've seen the best out of him already?

11. (NR) David Honzik, G, 7.0D
Drafted 3rd round, 71st overall, 2011

This big Czech goaltender, like Jensen, might have been a nice value pick where he fell to the Canucks. Some draft speculators had him going in the second round. Honzik has the size, athleticism and technique that would indicate an NHL future. A pure butterfly goaltender, Honzik is fairly well-polished and shows good rebound control.

His stats in 36 games at Victoriaville (3.54 goals against average, .884 save percentage) will not inspire greatness. However, one must remember this was Honzik's first year in North America, and also a great year for offense in the QMJHL. His 17-12-1 record better demonstrates his general effectiveness.

Again the writer shows he knows nothing as Honzik is very raw. The Canucks have a Hobey Baker finalist goaltender ranked 19th who is said to have NHL potentail ranked 19th when he is much more polished than Honzik.

20. (15) Prab Rai, C, 6.5D
Drafted 5th round, 131st overall, 2008

At the tail end of a strong overage junior season in Seattle (WHL) in 2009-10, the Canucks signed Rai to a 3-year pro contract. He then suffered a serious back injury and missed all of the 2010-11 season.

Rai was born in Surrey, BC and is often spotted driving around Vancouver. He is also a subject of a great deal of debate among Vancouver fans, is he a legitimate prospect or a high-scoring junior player who lacks the foot speed to succeed in the pros? A healthy 2011-12 should provide some answers.

Really? Just really? why talk about him being spotted around here when justifying where he is ranked?!?
On top of that no Canuck fan argues that, most see he has a slim to none chance of ever making the NHL.
Also since when does Rai lack foot speed? This just proves this writer just made stuff up as Rai is known for his speediness LOL!

Once again HF proves that a 12 year old could do a better job evaluating their favorite team's prospects than they can! To not even do 10 seconds worth of re-seach to realize 1 guy has already reached the potential given to him, another is very raw and not polished, and the last has amazing foot speed but lacks a drive

Click to read more...

 

[40oz]

I blame the government

 

[Shesty31]

Really saddening sometimes how people degrade HF so much, seeing as they are offering a free service that they don't even have to offer in the first place. Sure their rankings are never amazing, but half the time people view them as "out to lunch" because the people themselves are homers who think every single prospect of theirs is going to be a star.

I am not saying that HF rankings are great. They aren't. But it's pathetic how hard some people get on them sometimes.

 

[Abyss]

Really saddening sometimes how people degrade HF so much, seeing as they are offering a free service that they don't even have to offer in the first place. Sure their rankings are never amazing, but half the time people view them as "out to lunch" because the people themselves are homers who think every single prospect of theirs is going to be a star.

I am not saying that HF rankings are great. They aren't. But it's pathetic how hard some people get on them sometimes.

the problem is people look at the ratings now, when really you can't tell if the ratings are good or horrible until after few years...

 

[McDNicks17]

A 6.5B grade means he has a good shot of being better than Campoli and worse than Ehrhoff.

Are you actually complaining about that?...

 

[John Jaeckel]

Mea Culpa

Re: Rai

This is not HF's fault. It's mine. It was an honest mistake. And I am working to correct it and certainly not repeat it.

On the other comments, not sure I completely agree, but your feedback is genuinely appreciated.

 

[The Pucks]

Really?

You disagree with the rankings on three players and you make a thread about it on the main board?

Really?

Come on now, thats pure childish bull crap.

 

[Synergy27]

The OP should be used in the dictionary in place of however "proof" is currently defined.

 

[Pi]

You see...when HF writers give their opinions they usually don't have the magic 8 ball with them so they can go wrong too..but they are just GUIDELINES as to what a player can become. It's like this.. if HFBoard writers were NFL prospect graders..Tom Brady sure as hell wouldn't have gotten more than a 6.5B when he was drafted right now he's a 10.0A QB.

Same ways, some prospects do better, some don't and some do exactly the same as they were drafted/signed to be.

 

[mcphllp]

someone isnt happy that their team's prospect list isnt very good

 

[King'sPawn]

As for the rankings/ratings, it's a combination of foreseen upside and metaphysical certainty of reaching that upside. These are imperfect rankings, and even the professional scouts miss on ranking prospects all the time. To get bent out of shape over a free service making the exact same type of projections is asinine.

As to the bit about a player seen driving around... it's fluff. Unless it's incorrect, then why do you care? Different writers have different styles.

 

[zeke]

Today they released the Canucks top 20 prospects.
While the list itself in order of 1-20 was not overly bad until it reached the last 5ish prospects, the ratings were just out right horrible and the reasoning for some were even worse!

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/13243/hodgson_still_tops_in_vancouver_prospect_pool/



Now HF describes a 6.5 defense-man to be a 5-6 defense-man at best. Is it just me or was Tanev not already just that last season? If not worse they put a B as in he may drop one grade to a #7 dman. Tanev has definately already been a #7 dman in his rookie year so are they saying he won't improve at all from his rookie year and we've seen the best out of him already?



Again the writer shows he knows nothing as Honzik is very raw. The Canucks have a Hobey Baker finalist goaltender ranked 19th who is said to have NHL potentail ranked 19th when he is much more polished than Honzik.



Really? Just really? why talk about him being spotted around here when justifying where he is ranked?!?
On top of that no Canuck fan argues that, most see he has a slim to none chance of ever making the NHL.
Also since when does Rai lack foot speed? This just proves this writer just made stuff up as Rai is known for his speediness LOL!

Once again HF proves that a 12 year old could do a better job evaluating their favorite team's prospects than they can! To not even do 10 seconds worth of re-seach to realize 1 guy has already reached the potential given to him, another is very raw and not polished, and the last has amazing foot speed but lacks a drive

Your prospects aren't as good as you think. The HF writer has a much better idea of how good they are than you do.

Tanev was an injury fill in last year, not a legit #5-6 defenseman. In fact, he was a legit bottom pair defenseman....in the AHL. He may never be a legit NHL defenseman, and odds are heavily against him ever being a top-4 defenseman.

You've never seen Honzik play, or even talked to anyone who has seen him play.

The comment about Rai driving around town was just colour, not a "justification".


Stop crying.

 

[danishh]

it depends on your writer.

some hf writers are great.

some, however, are crap.

canucks seem to have been stuck with the latter this year.



You should read the sens article. Not only does the writer not watch hockey, but he is apparently in dire need of an editor... or spell check.

 

[WonderTwinsUnite]

Your prospects aren't as good as you think. The HF writer has a much better idea of how good they are than you do.

Tanev was an injury fill in last year, not a legit #5-6 defenseman. In fact, he was a legit bottom pair defenseman....in the AHL. He may never be a legit NHL defenseman, and odds are heavily against him ever being a top-4 defenseman.

You've never seen Honzik play, or even talked to anyone who has seen him play.

The comment about Rai driving around town was just colour, not a "justification".


Stop crying.

I like how you berate him for never seeing Honzik and making assumptions about his play right after you do the exact same thing to Tanev. He absolutely was a 5-6 defenseman last year (caliber-wise).

 

[nowhereman]

Your prospects aren't as good as you think. The HF writer has a much better idea of how good they are than you do.

Tanev was an injury fill in last year, not a legit #5-6 defenseman. In fact, he was a legit bottom pair defenseman....in the AHL. He may never be a legit NHL defenseman, and odds are heavily against him ever being a top-4 defenseman.

In regards to Tanev, no he doesn't. What makes his opinion on the kid any more definitive than anyone else?

Tanev is more like a 7.0B/C. He's very poised under pressure, much like a young Alexander Edler, and has all the tools to be a very good 2nd pairing defensemen. He's filled out his wiry frame this last summer and has already gained 10 pounds. To say he's not even a legitimate bottom-pairing defenseman is wrong. He's just not a legit bottom pairing defenseman on, by far, the deepest defense in the league. On any other team, he'd be a solid #5-#6 guy.

You've never seen Honzik play, or even talked to anyone who has seen him play.

Canucks fans have seen a lot of Honzik this preason, so your presumption might just be a little ridiculous.

 

[HockeySauce]

I like how you berate him for never seeing Honzik and making assumptions about his play right after you do the exact same thing to Tanev. He absolutely was a 5-6 defenseman last year (caliber-wise).

Actually, Tanev was a number 1 Dman last year, don'tyaknow?

 

[babblemoth]

The comment about Rai driving around town was just colour, not a "justification".


Stop crying.

So that's how they rate prospects? On their race? Tending to think the OP may be more right than wrong.

 

[Avs44]

So that's how they rate prospects? On their race? Tending to think the OP may be more right than wrong.

Ummm, what? You realize when he said "color" he was not meaning skin color right? Wow. Some people are so dense

 

[StarvinArvyn33]

why dont you just let your precious canuck prospects shut everyone up by proving themselves....may be a good idea other than bashing someones writing. neeeewwwbbbbiiiiiiccuuusss

 

[MetalGodAOD*]

Ummm, what? You realize when he said "color" he was not meaning skin color right? Wow. Some people are so dense

woosh

 

[thestonedkoala]

Harri Sateri 7.0C
Matt Hackett 7.0C...

Wha?

 

[OnlyTheBrave*]

You should take ratings like that with a grain of salt, always. I take what I know about prospects from the team sites and the scouts they find information from for players, scouts that you will see on NHL.com or TSN.ca talking about prospects, etc.

 

[Bgav]

The prab rai driving around part was pretty funny

lmfao

 

[Slim Cognito*]

The proof is in the pudding.

 

[Benttheknee]

Guys like Tanev are simply harder to figure out. He has been a prospect for only 1 year, so getting a 6.5 B is quite reasonable given his background. He played quite well last season, but it is a small sample size, and the more time he is in the league, the more people know how he plays, and how to play against him.

I can't comment on the other guys.

Overall, look at it this way.... 17 out of 20 prospect ratings were good in your estimation.

As a Sens fan, we had a few issues as well, most notably Lehner's downgrade after his AHL playoff MVP performance :p