Prospects: Extreme Toolbox Edition

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I saw this post on the main board and it gave me an idea. We are all very interested in and excited about (if that's allowed) our prospects and our future. While we understand that they aren't the finished article yet and no one can predict the future, we are dying to know about them - what their role will be, how they will fit into the overall scheme of a Stanley Cup contending squad.

Here is the post (it is about Colorado):

... why has any team been bad ever in the history of the league? Colorado checks a lot of those boxes: no depth, awful defense, and their best players are more complementary tools-first type players instead of the highly intelligent, complete package kind you need to build around to win.

Fans overestimate good hands and speed because they immediately catch your eye. But your players need to know where to go on the ice, how to make fundamental decisions and defensive reads, and how to pass the puck. Watch the best teams in the league. Their passes are crisp and on the tape all game long.

My questions are:

1) Do you agree with the above assessment, or do you think he has it wrong? I would like to reiterate that this is not about the Avs -
I mean in general, in hockey terms, do you agree with what the poster had to say about what you need in a team?

2) Which of our prospects fit the above categories, and which are something else, and what are they if they aren't either of the above?
Most of us understand that players like G, Ghost, Couts and Provy have high hockey IQ and are those "complete package" players
that you build around - which of our prospects are like this?

3) Generally speaking, how do you see this team being built a year from now, or two, or three?
What roles do you see the prospects filling?

We are always asking questions of the guys that watch the prospects a lot and I thought it would be nice to have a conversation
about them where we tried to impose some order on where exactly we think we are heading with them. If nobody is interested,
I am sure HC or MSE or Beef won't mind chucking this in the bin lol

Click to read more...

 

[Larry44]

1. Agree hockey sense is important. Avs fan has it right and is talking about guys like Duchene who are fast and stupid and never win.

2. Flyers are in great shape because Hexy and scouts place a huge emphasis on smarts and competitiveness. We have a solid core of top players at F and G. The D is coming soon. When kids like Leier, Laughton, Aube-Kubel, Lindblom, Rubtsov, Allison, Kase, Vorobyov, Laberge, Laczynski, etc push for spots it will get even better. They all have hockey sense as a prime attribute.

3. Kids will slot into roles. Lindblom will replace Raffl at 1LW, for example, making the team deeper. D is going to be dangerous all the time.

 

[Tripod]

Just looking at the forwards, I think we are in need of the guys who you build around. And that is not surprising because those guys are hard to come by.

We POTENTIALLY have replacements for Schenn, Couts, Simmonds in Allison, Rubstov, Laberge. But as if now, we lack the guys to replace Giroux and Voracek. Maybe Konecny could provide the offense and skill one day. But we are missing the next "star".

But the good news is that our D prospects are developing quite nicely so at some point could trade one for that guy.....as we saw with Hall and Johanson.

We also have a few drafts to try and find those replacements. It won't be easy, but we should be drafting heavy at forward the next few years so hopefully we get lucky. We also have been collecting lots of assets that we might not be able to fit into the lineup, so could see a quantity for quality deal.

We at least have options when you have a deep prospect pool to dip into.

 

[Flyerfan13]

I agree with all the above ...This trade deadline and off season is going to be big for this franchise...can hextall trade for a center or scoring winger before the expansion draft? Does he bring in a veteran dman to help the kids along for a couple years I don't see mdz, Schultz or streit as that player? Does hextall trade up in the draft for a key piece of the rebuild? All questions that will be answered in the near future...

 

[whitstifier]

Just looking at the forwards, I think we are in need of the guys who you build around. And that is not surprising because those guys are hard to come by.

We POTENTIALLY have replacements for Schenn, Couts, Simmonds in Allison, Rubstov, Laberge. But as if now, we lack the guys to replace Giroux and Voracek. Maybe Konecny could provide the offense and skill one day. But we are missing the next "star".

But the good news is that our D prospects are developing quite nicely so at some point could trade one for that guy.....as we saw with Hall and Johanson.

We also have a few drafts to try and find those replacements. It won't be easy, but we should be drafting heavy at forward the next few years so hopefully we get lucky. We also have been collecting lots of assets that we might not be able to fit into the lineup, so could see a quantity for quality deal.

We at least have options when you have a deep prospect pool to dip into.

This seems like an overblown concern. The Flyers have one of the best forward groups in the league. Forward prospect talent might rank in the top third, no? It's not so important to have star forwards either with as much talent from the blue line the Flyers could have.

You also forgot to mention Lindblom. He's one of the safer bets to be a top 6 forward, and he's got upside

 

[Tripod]

This seems like an overblown concern. The Flyers have one of the best forward groups in the league. Forward prospect talent might rank in the top third, no? It's not so important to have star forwards either with as much talent from the blue line the Flyers could have.

You also forgot to mention Lindblom. He's one of the safer bets to be a top 6 forward, and he's got upside

You are right....I missed Lindblom somehow.

My concern is not overblown. I am not overly worried about replacing G and Jake because there are plenty of years to do so. All I was saying was that we look to be in good shape to replace most of the other roster at some point if development falls well.

However, we don't have that #1C replacement in our system yet and it can be a hard thing to get if you are not drafting high in the draft. If we had that 1 high, end C prospect, we would be set up quite well going forward.

Luckily, we tend to draft well in the 1st round and have found gems like G, Richards, Gagne, Williams, etc...all while drafting in the 20's. We just need to do it again. Or make a trade at some point.

So again, not too concerned because we actually have the depth to make a move if/when we need to. But TODAY, Giroux's replacement is not on our roster or doesn't seem to be in our prospect pool either. But we have time.

 

[Les Averman]

This seems like an overblown concern. The Flyers have one of the best forward groups in the league. Forward prospect talent might rank in the top third, no? It's not so important to have star forwards either with as much talent from the blue line the Flyers could have.

You also forgot to mention Lindblom. He's one of the safer bets to be a top 6 forward, and he's got upside

I don't think that it's an overblown concern at all. Yes, we have a lot of defensive talent in the ranks and they should do well in our system (provided it's still our system in a few years) but by the time those defensive players are all ready to compete at a high level, a lot of our forwards will be on their downswing. Konecny is really the only guy in our prospect system that looks destined to be a "guaranteed" top 6 player and I'm not sure that he'd be considered an elite player like a Giroux or a Voracek. I do agree that defensive players can carry a team, but on the contrary, you can look at what the Penguins did last year with just Letang and Daley. On the other side, look at how Nashville faired a couple years ago despite their defense or the Blues recently.

I'm not by any means saying that we won't have what it takes in a few years, but I do agree with Tripod that we may need to improve the top-level talent on the offensive side of the puck in a couple years. However, we also should be in a position to do that with the prospect pool that we have, notably being able to dangle a top young defenseman if these guys continue to develop as they have been.

 

[Flyotes]

1) I don't think there is a specific "must have" formula for winning as you can win in multiple ways with different types of players. I prefer building like so: Defensemen/1 stud Netminder. Centers. Wings. I think that gives a team the best chance to win a lot of games long term against multiple team compositions. I think you can win with a team full of "standard" players with no "complete" or all stars players - in theory. Difficult -- and the standings usually bear it out.

2) I'd rather answer this question this way: You draft players that have all four Ss (size, speed, skill, sense) if able. If not, then you look at a guy that has 3 of the 4 -- and has an upside in one of those areas that can overshadow the missing S. Look at Giroux. Not the biggest guy, but his other skills diminish that negative significantly because some of those skills are premier. Examine the current prospects by that method (TK would have 3 of the 4).

3) I see them bringing up the D prospects, selectively staggering contracts (if able) to create a nice combination of cheap pro players, vets, and young vets on cheaper, newly minted post RFA contracts -- to take a run at the cup. A perfect capstorm of talent at the right time to kick open the window. Sacrificing one great prospect at the trade deadline for a stud player for the run. Continue to draft D in later rounds (or early, if it makes more sense), but begin to ramp up the forward prospect core (so that the influx of draftees is sustainable as people move on from the team-- thus keeping the window opened). Keep the current core and begin to plug in prospects on the wings. Allow the all-stars to punish teams, and keep the prospect depth so strong teams can't counter it for 60 minutes. I like what Hextall has been doing with guys like Raffl. I see Tanner in the same way. A guy who can move up and down the lineup. At worse, a bottom sixer. But has the talent to pot some goals and, when injuries happen, maybe, just maybe, creep into the top 6. The ability to roll multiple talented lines in waves, coupled with the young D studs.. scary!

I'd imagine Rubs starts out lower, but moves up into the top 6. Some of the AHL forwards become wingers. Defensive prospects -- they'll just be up. Maybe they hang on to Mase for 3 years and create a tough spot at netminder. Move him to another team at the right time if Lyon or Hart are pounding at the door and Stolarz is set as backup and needs to start more. If one of the AHL/Euro top six wingers is an overachiever -- the Flyers become stupidly strong at forward. Also, imagine someone like Lindblom coming in and the Flyers hit the lottery and he's a stud. A free top sixer.

 

[Tripod]

the thing to remember too is that our top 6 forwards are signed for at minimum, 2 years(Simmonds). So anyone we add, gives us insane depth. Lindblom will be one....and we "only" need him to be a good 3rd liner. And at worst, Raffl is on the 3rd line.

That #3C spot is such a glaring hole, and Rubstov is 2-3 years away. Finding that guy to bridge the gap should be Hextall's biggest move between now and next season.

Future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.

 

[Rebels57]

I agree with the assesment that tools aren't everything.

Hockey sense is equally as important. The best players in the world have both in equal measure. If you only have tools without hockey sense, you end up with a guy like Duchene or Hall. If you have both, you end up with guys like Giroux or Crosby. Knowing what to do away from the puck is such an underrated aspect of hockey for viewers, and is something I imagine coachs follow very closely; which may explain when a player is benched in the 3rd or scratched for a game to the chagrin of the fans.

As for our prospect pool, I am not too worried about not having "obvious elite prospects" that will eventually supplant Giroux and Voracek.

First of all, Giroux was never an elite prospect. He was drafted 22nd overall; just like German Rubstov. Whose to say that Rubstov isn't a late-bloomer like Giroux that ends up a massive steal and a 1C? Konecny sure looks like a steal at 24th overall already..and I think he needs to be considered an elite prospect on his own right.

Let's say Rubstov tops out as a 2C and we don't have the obvious 1C replacement, maybe we find one via trade, maybe we find one via free agency, or maybe we become a team that has two above average 2Cs and not true 1C like this years New York Rangers. That doesn't seem to be slowing them down. Depth is becoming more important than being top-heavy anyway.

If there is one thing the Flyers have always been graced with, it's great Centers, and I don't expect that to change anytime soon.

 

[Flyerfan13]

I don't think u necessarily need "star" players if u are building a team in the form of the Devils cup teams from the net out which looks to be the plan...not the most exciting to watch but very effective in winning championships...

 

[Psuhockey]

1) Do you agree with the above assessment, or do you think he has it wrong? I would like to reiterate that this is not about the Avs -
I mean in general, in hockey terms, do you agree with what the poster had to say about what you need in a team?
3) Generally speaking, how do you see this team being built a year from now, or two, or three?
What roles do you see the prospects filling?

If you look at the past 20 years or so of Stanley Cup winners, you can see a pattern outside the occasional anomaly like Carolina. The vast majority have had at least one Hall of fame level Norris caliber defenseman. Those without had two hall of fame level centers (Colorado: Sakic Forsberg, Stars: Nieuwendyk Modano, Pittsburgh: Crosby Malkin). So if you look at those teams that have won multiple cups in the last 20-25 years, the model the Flyers most look like is the New Jersey Devils.

The Devils had two HOF defenders and a HOF goalie. They did not have any HOF centers. What they had at center were above average two way guys like Jason Arnott and Bobby Holik. Their most skilled offensive forwards were on the wings. The biggest strength at forward wasn't in any one or two superstars but having depth scoring across all three lines.

Now is that a formula that can win now? Boston did win a cup with a similar setup devoid of superstar centers although I think Bergeron is close and will be in the HOF. But they also didn't have the depth of stud defensemen the Devils had.

Personally I think the Flyers are building an exact same setup. Their defense prospect pool is as impressive as they come. They don't have the superstar forward prospect but they look like they have a lot of above average ones to stock multiple lines. And down the middle is being built with two way guys like Couturier and Rubtsov. So is there a Martin Brodeur like goalie in the prospect pool?

 

[StoneHands]

I don't think u necessarily need "star" players if u are building a team in the form of the Devils cup teams from the net out which looks to be the plan...not the most exciting to watch but very effective in winning championships...

That sounds good an all but when was the last time a team without an offensive star won the Cup? Maybe the 2011 Bruins if you don't consider Bergeron a star player (I personally do) and they also had Thomas who won the Vezina that season. Other than that the only other team I can think of that even made the Cup final that didn't have a star forward would be the Rangers but they had Lundqvist. So of the 22 teams to make the final since the '05 lockout 1 or maybe 2 teams did not have a star forward and both had Vezina caliber goalies which the Flyers do not.

 

[Rebels57]

That sounds good an all but when was the last time a team without an offensive star won the Cup? Maybe the 2011 Bruins if you don't consider Bergeron a star player (I personally do) and they also had Thomas who won the Vezina that season. Other than that the only other team I can think of that even made the Cup final that didn't have a star forward would be the Rangers but they had Lundqvist. So of the 22 teams to make the final since the '05 lockout 1 or maybe 2 teams did not have a star forward and both had Vezina caliber goalies which the Flyers do not.

Rubstov is a higher rated prospect than Bergeron was at the time he was drafted. Also, Bergeron in 2011 hadn't yet peaked. In fact, Krejci was their 1C.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

The Devils had two HOF defenders and a HOF goalie. They did not have any HOF centers. What they had at center were above average two way guys like Jason Arnott and Bobby Holik. Their most skilled offensive forwards were on the wings. The biggest strength at forward wasn't in any one or two superstars but having depth scoring across all three lines.

This is one thing I loved about the mid-80s Flyers. I don't know what the statistics say about it, but I remember feeling that we had a chance to score no matter who was out there (aside from the Dave Brown line) and I remember that I trusted everyone on that team not to **** the bed when the other team was in full flow. It feels like Hexy is building something similar to that (or like you said, the Devils), only with a jacked-up version of that 80s Flyers defense corps (which was pretty solid in its own right). I really like this kind of team building because it is ... well, nothing is totally "slump proof," but it is as close to that as you can get, I think.

 

[Curufinwe]

I'm not worried about replacing Voracek. He's in the first year of an eight year deal. He also has the size and skating ability to stay at a high level for a long time. Like Hossa has.

Voracek is also an example of a guy who only became a star at 23/24. I can't say any of our forward prospects outside of Konecny look like they have a good chance be stars, but they are all young so who knows.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

"Hockey sense" matters even more than the equivalent in other sports because hockey is less frequently about a 1v1 or even 2v2 matchup and more about spatial awareness and planning, especially at 5v5. This also makes it in turn more difficult to hide a player's deficiencies on the ice. This game, played at the modern short-shift pace, takes an incredible amount of (I think the term was) perceptual-cognitive processing. Hockey is, although less than it used to be, somewhat of a free form game on a larger scale -- especially when you compare it to football, basketball, or baseball.

 

[Flyerfan13]

That sounds good an all but when was the last time a team without an offensive star won the Cup? Maybe the 2011 Bruins if you don't consider Bergeron a star player (I personally do) and they also had Thomas who won the Vezina that season. Other than that the only other team I can think of that even made the Cup final that didn't have a star forward would be the Rangers but they had Lundqvist. So of the 22 teams to make the final since the '05 lockout 1 or maybe 2 teams did not have a star forward and both had Vezina caliber goalies which the Flyers do not.

Great point... I don't look closely enough at other teams rosters after the flyers are out of the playoffs to see the makeup of their teams...building a team with a great defense,good goaltending and strong 2 way forwards with a few 30 goal scorers mixed in looks to be our rebuilding plan...not sure how many teams have tried that approach since 05...

 

[Larry44]

This is one thing I loved about the mid-80s Flyers. I don't know what the statistics say about it, but I remember feeling that we had a chance to score no matter who was out there (aside from the Dave Brown line) and I remember that I trusted everyone on that team not to **** the bed when the other team was in full flow. It feels like Hexy is building something similar to that (or like you said, the Devils), only with a jacked-up version of that 80s Flyers defense corps (which was pretty solid in its own right). I really like this kind of team building because it is ... well, nothing is totally "slump proof," but it is as close to that as you can get, I think.

The current team has some of the same resiliency as the '80s teams. They never give up. That's something else, like hockey sense, that you can't really teach.

 

[Flyotes]

"Hockey sense" matters even more than the equivalent in other sports because hockey is less frequently about a 1v1 or even 2v2 matchup and more about spatial awareness and planning, especially at 5v5. This also makes it in turn more difficult to hide a player's deficiencies on the ice. This game, played at the modern short-shift pace, takes an incredible amount of (I think the term was) perceptual-cognitive processing. Hockey is, although less than it used to be, somewhat of a free form game on a larger scale -- especially when you compare it to football, basketball, or baseball.

Yeah, it is sense because you don't really have time to think it. You "thought" it when you learned it, then you drilled it into being 2nd nature. Then you combine it with talent and you get something like hockey sense. It is a Heideggerian "familiarity" -- like when you drive your car and aren't aware of it. Then you get to your destination and can't remember driving at all and it stuns you for a second. It becomes built in. Baseball players can ruin their swing by thinking about it, instead of relying upon what they've built inside themselves.

Heidegger uses the example of playing pool. You could never "think" all the physics involved with a shot. It's beyond thought. Your mind, through familiarity, practice, talent, just knows how to make the crazy shot (in the case of pros and trick shot players). The calculus involved is beyond being held in active awareness.

It isn't even a uniform trait -- it is subject-ive -- players have to even have the sense to know when to conserve energy on a shift so they can anticipate the right moment to engage, and so forth. Shouldn't be surprising that a lot of the NHL stars have god given talent and started playing hockey very young. They would be out on the ice in the mornings, then after school, then at night, while other kids did other things. You can find that a lot in articles about certain players when they give some bio info out.

That's part of the reason Keith Jones is a freak. Guy barely practiced and kept falling upward. I'd wager he has a supremely good head on his shoulders, even if he pretends he doesn't.

The current team has some of the same resiliency as the '80s teams. They never give up. That's something else, like hockey sense, that you can't really teach.

Yes. And they haven't given up for years now. Something within this core of the team is good that way.

 

[StoneHands]

Rubstov is a higher rated prospect than Bergeron was at the time he was drafted. Also, Bergeron in 2011 hadn't yet peaked. In fact, Krejci was their 1C.

I don't know what draft ranking has to do with anything. Could Rubtsov be as good as Bergeron? Sure, but just because he was drafted in a higher spot doesn't give me confidence that he will be. If Rubtsov in his prime turns out to be as good as Bergeron was in '11, that draft pick is an absolute home run.

And sure, Bergeron had not yet peaked but he was definitely in the early part of his prime as an elite two-way player. He finished 4th in Selke voting that season and had 57 points and won the Selke the next year with 64 points so it's not like he was a kid.

Either way, if your point was that Bergeron was not a star player at that time then fine, of the 22 teams to be in the Cup final since the lockout there have been 2 teams to make it without a star forward but both of those teams had elite, vezina caliber goalies which the Flyers do not.

 

[Rebels57]

I don't know what draft ranking has to do with anything. Could Rubtsov be as good as Bergeron? Sure, but just because he was drafted in a higher spot doesn't give me confidence that he will be. If Rubtsov in his prime turns out to be as good as Bergeron was in '11, that draft pick is an absolute home run.

And sure, Bergeron had not yet peaked but he was definitely in the early part of his prime as an elite two-way player. He finished 4th in Selke voting that season and had 57 points and won the Selke the next year with 64 points so it's not like he was a kid.

Either way, if your point was that Bergeron was not a star player at that time then fine, of the 22 teams to be in the Cup final since the lockout there have been 2 teams to make it without a star forward but both of those teams had elite, vezina caliber goalies which the Flyers do not.

The point I was making is that we dont know yet if Rubstov will or wont be as good as Bergeron; no one thought Bergeron would be this good or he would have been drafted a lot earlier.

 

[deadhead]

With the defensemen they're developing, in HAKSTOL's system, they don't need an offensive superstar, rather, solid offensive depth with players who are smart enought to play in this scheme.

This is because if this offense can make guys like MacDonald into offensive threats, imagine a team with Ghost, Provorov, Myers and Sanheim. And that takes the pressure off a few forwards to carry the entire offense when you have talented offensive defensemen who are put in position to use their entire skill set.

As far as intangibles, just watch Provorov, he has an innate sense of positioning on defense, something most defensemen ten years older don't possess. His offense is a work in progress as he learns what he can and can't get away in this scheme, but that's the hardest thing for defensemen to learn, because this scheme requires a balance of caution and aggression.

 

[Tripod]

With the defensemen they're developing, in HAKSTOL's system, they don't need an offensive superstar, rather, solid offensive depth with players who are smart enought to play in this scheme.

This is because if this offense can make guys like MacDonald into offensive threats, imagine a team with Ghost, Provorov, Myers and Sanheim. And that takes the pressure off a few forwards to carry the entire offense when you have talented offensive defensemen who are put in position to use their entire skill set.

As far as intangibles, just watch Provorov, he has an innate sense of positioning on defense, something most defensemen ten years older don't possess. His offense is a work in progress as he learns what he can and can't get away in this scheme, but that's the hardest thing for defensemen to learn, because this scheme requires a balance of caution and aggression.

Provy is top 10 in ES points by Dmen. Is it really that much of a work in progress if he is top 10?

 

[phil162888]

I'm not worried about replacing Voracek. He's in the first year of an eight year deal. He also has the size and skating ability to stay at a high level for a long time. Like Hossa has.

Voracek is also an example of a guy who only became a star at 23/24. I can't say any of our forward prospects outside of Konecny look like they have a good chance be stars, but they are all young so who knows.

We have these players that have a very good chance of being impact players

Hart
Provy
Konecny
Myers
Morin
Sanheim

Then we have the next list of guys that could be impact players but are by no means sure things

Lindbolm
Stolarz
Lyon
Sandstrom
Hagg
Allison
Rubstov
Vorobiev
Labarge

Thats a pretty impressive list to be honest. With the high demand and limited supply of top tier defencemen its a very real possibility we get our next elite forward through a trade for one of our dmen aka Johannson for Jones or larsson for Hall. The scouting staff has been exceptional