Rangers Prospect Poll (Summer 2018): #15 Prospect

[kovazub94]

No. I think that's unlikely.

What I meant in saying that Pajuniemi would have been compared to Kotkaniemi and Kupari is that he would have been in the discussion with them about the best Finnish prospects coming out the Liiga this year. I think Kotkaniemi and Kupari would have been ranked ahead of Pajuniemi, but I think Pajuniemi would have been brought up in the discussion. Here are their scoring rates in the Liiga last year:

Kotkaniemi - 0.47 ppg
Kupari - 0.31 ppg
Pajuniemi - 0.27 ppg

Particularly compared to Kupari, Pajuniemi isn't that far behind. Kupari is probably a more skilled player, but Pajuniemi is a very good skater who made some professional hockey players look foolish a couple times last year. It's not like he lacks skill.

I think Pajuniemi gets dismissed a little bit because he was in his second year of draft eligibility, but he only qualified for the 2017 draft by 4 days. It seems arbitrary to me. He's only 4 days older than Brady Tkachuk. That could just have been one doctor deciding to do a c-section and another deciding to wait. It's entirely possible possible that Tkachuk was conceived before him. The date of conception would probably be a better benchmark for someone's physical development than their birth date. It just doesn't entirely make sense to me to act like there's this big bright line separating prospects who were eligible for different drafts because of as little as 4 days.

Pajuniemi is only 6 months older than Kupari and put up basically the same numbers in the same league. Does that make Pajuniemi a worse prospect than Kupari? Probably a little bit, but only a little bit. Does Kupari have more skill and higher upside? I think so. But I don't think they are in an entirely different class of prospect just because Pajuniemi was born 4 days ahead of some arbitrary cut off date.

Love your second paragraph!

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Add Huska

 

[n8]

top 20 is looking mighty solid

 

[Matt4776]

Lindbom. Add Huska.

 

[Edge]

Going with Day while fully acknowledging he could be an NHL regular or playing in Europe in 3 years.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Going with Day while fully acknowledging he could be an NHL regular or playing in Europe in 3 years.

I think that could be said for the last couple selections and the next 7 or so to be slotted in.

 

[Edge]

I think that could be said for the last couple selections and the next 7 or so to be slotted in.

Yeah, but I think with Day I can honestly say I have no idea which way it will go.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

Barron, add Gilmour. Good year-to-year trajectory, one obvious elite, projectable skill, higher PPG in the AHL than Nieves as a defenseman, let's goooo

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Barron. Add Lindqvist.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Meskanen, add Gilmour.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

What's crazy here is that a player like Nieves, who doesn't have a ceiling above a 4th liner, but has a very good shot of hitting that, went even be in the top 20.

 

[kovazub94]

What's crazy here is that a player like Nieves, who doesn't have a ceiling above a 4th liner, but has a very good shot of hitting that, went even be in the top 20.

Does not make sense to me either. Nieves and Gilmour should have been ranked already.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

What's crazy here is that a player like Nieves, who doesn't have a ceiling above a 4th liner, but has a very good shot of hitting that, went even be in the top 20.

I’m not convinced at all that he will be a NHL regular, even on a 4th line. Need to see more from him.

 

[Savant]

Day, add Huska

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Ragnarsson. I don't think it's broadly appreciated how impressive his performance in the Allsvenskan was.

First of all, the Allsvenskan is a legit pro league. Rob Vollman has found that the Allsvenskan is comparable to the AHL in terms of how tough it is to score in (Re-approaching the methodology of NHLe).

Secondly, Ragnarsson's 13 points is the most by any U19 defenseman in the Allsvenskan other than OEL and is tied with Mattias Ekholm and Rasmus Andersson. OEL and Ekholm are two of the best defensemen in the NHL today. Andersson is now a top prospect for the Flames who scored almost a ppg in the AHL at 21 last year. (The year after Andersson posted 13 points in the Allsvenskan, he went to the OHL and scored a ppg. As a point of comparison, that's a higher rate than Day just scored at in his overage year).

Ragnarsson played solid defense against pros at 18 and profiles well in that regard too.

I don't think we have any prospects remaining who profile comparably to guys that turned into top caliber NHL players the way that Ragnarsson does. There's a reason he's one of the highest drafted players remaining on this list. Even if there is more risk to Ragnarsson making the NHL than a guy like Meskanen, I'll take the chance on a guy who has a higher likelihood of becoming more than a bottom line player.

Add Pajuniemi. If he was born 4 days later, I think he would have been compared to Kotkaniemi and Kupari in this draft.

No. I think that's unlikely.

What I meant in saying that Pajuniemi would have been compared to Kotkaniemi and Kupari is that he would have been in the discussion with them about the best Finnish prospects coming out the Liiga this year. I think Kotkaniemi and Kupari would have been ranked ahead of Pajuniemi, but I think Pajuniemi would have been brought up in the discussion. Here are their scoring rates in the Liiga last year:

Kotkaniemi - 0.47 ppg
Kupari - 0.31 ppg
Pajuniemi - 0.27 ppg

Particularly compared to Kupari, Pajuniemi isn't that far behind. Kupari is probably a more skilled player, but Pajuniemi is a very good skater who made some professional hockey players look foolish a couple times last year. It's not like he lacks skill.

I think Pajuniemi gets dismissed a little bit because he was in his second year of draft eligibility, but he only qualified for the 2017 draft by 4 days. It seems arbitrary to me. He's only 4 days older than Brady Tkachuk. That could just have been one doctor deciding to do a c-section and another deciding to wait. It's entirely possible possible that Tkachuk was conceived before him. The date of conception would probably be a better benchmark for someone's physical development than their birth date. It just doesn't entirely make sense to me to act like there's this big bright line separating prospects who were eligible for different drafts because of as little as 4 days.

Pajuniemi is only 6 months older than Kupari and put up basically the same numbers in the same league. Does that make Pajuniemi a worse prospect than Kupari? Probably a little bit, but only a little bit. Does Kupari have more skill and higher upside? I think so. But I don't think they are in an entirely different class of prospect just because Pajuniemi was born 4 days ahead of some arbitrary cut off date.

Great stuff on both prospects.