Prospect Info: Rangers Prospect Thread (Player Stats/Info in Post #2; Updated 10.7.20)

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I've generally seen D+x used to refer to the seasons after a player was actually drafted. I don't really see people use it to refer to seasons after you were first eligible. Like I don't recall anyone talking about Lakatos' first post-draft year being his D+3 season or anything.

It's tricky to find the right way to go about it. Most times the "D+x" wording is used in a comparison between prospects so for me it makes sense to go by the first year a player was draft eligible. Panarin's D+3 for instance was 2012-13.

2018-219 - the year after he was drafted by the Rangers, not when he became eligible in the context of the discussion.

Gotcha. Then I agree with you on his performance.

 

[kovazub94]

I've generally seen D+x used to refer to the seasons after a player was actually drafted. I don't really see people use it to refer to seasons after you were first eligible. Like I don't recall anyone talking about Lakatos' first post-draft year being his D+3 season or anything.

I definitely agree with this but it depends on the context. Usually we do it to compare performances of two (or more) prospects and so birth age that drives eligibility is an important common denominator.

 

[kovazub94]

this is how I view it...otherwise you wouldn't need to specify. if it was the year he turned 18 +1 you'd just say the year he was 19 lol

Gilty as charged, your honor!

 

[nyr2k2]

It's tricky to find the right way to go about it. Most times the "D+x" wording is used in a comparison between prospects so for me it makes sense to go by the first year a player was draft eligible. Panarin's D+3 for instance was 2012-13.



Gotcha. Then I agree with you on his performance.

Maybe. Panarin wasn't drafted so he has no D+ seasons. It's important to note that guys haven't been drafted. If you're just saying D+(number based on their initial draft eligibility) then you're basically just saying "age 19/20/21/22/etc. season," so I don't know why you wouldn't just say that.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Maybe. Panarin wasn't drafted so he has no D+ seasons. It's important to note that guys haven't been drafted. If you're just saying D+(number based on their initial draft eligibility) then you're basically just saying "age 19/20/21/22/etc. season," so I don't know why you wouldn't just say that.

That's just the way it has been used for years. For instance, the premium filter Eliteprospect uses has seasons based on D+x for comparisons.

But if you want to talk about a specific draft class, then it's different of course. Gusev was drafted in 2012 but was first eligible in 2010. For the sake of player to player comparison, his D+3 would be 2012-13. For the sake of talking about his draft class, that season would be D+1.

 

[nyr2k2]

That's just the way it has been used for years. For instance, the premium filter Eliteprospect uses has seasons based on D+x for comparisons.

But if you want to talk about a specific draft class, then it's different of course. Gusev was drafted in 2012 but was first eligible in 2010. For the sake of player to player comparison, his D+3 would be 2012-13. For the sake of talking about his draft class, that season would be D+1.

I have EP premium but I have no idea what the filter is. I'll take your word for it.

This reminds me of the "CHL" thing (Champions Hockey League or Canadian Hockey League). I think most people here will interpret D+x as referring to years since a player was drafted, not since they were eligible (since again, that's just "age x season"). But, I guess it's preference.

 

[Leetch3]

 

[Algernop Kreider]

Maybe. Panarin wasn't drafted so he has no D+ seasons. It's important to note that guys haven't been drafted. If you're just saying D+(number based on their initial draft eligibility) then you're basically just saying "age 19/20/21/22/etc. season," so I don't know why you wouldn't just say that.

Because referring to age is more complicated since you have to look up a player's birthday. It's easier (though not necessarily the best way to think about it) to just think of everything in terms of hockey seasons using their draft eligible season as a reference point.

 

[cwede]

Because referring to age is more complicated since you have to look up a player's birthday. It's easier (though not necessarily the best way to think about it) to just think of everything in terms of hockey seasons using their draft eligible season as a reference point.

if you like doing it that way in your own head and notes, of course that's fine

but when communicating with others, you are setting yourself up for miscommunication, if you make up your own labelling rules
just like if you make up your own traffic rules for driving, others won't know your private rules, and bad results more likely to happen

in the greater hockey community, D+1, D+2 etc have a commonly understood meaning
as does 18-year old season, 19-year old season, etc

also, i don't really get the 'easier' part you mention, the only way you would know that player's draft-eligible and drafted seasons differ is by looking THAT up, so either way, you are looking up something

anyway, i think D+1 is actually quite useful, regardless of age.
After being drafted, the player, his coaches, teammates, opponents, will see him at least a bit differently, and how he responds can reflect how he progresses at higher levels with stiffer competition and accountability.

 

[Algernop Kreider]

if you like doing it that way in your own head and notes, of course that's fine

but when communicating with others, you are setting yourself up for miscommunication, if you make up your own labelling rules
just like if you make up your own traffic rules for driving, others won't know your private rules, and bad results more likely to happen

in the greater hockey community, D+1, D+2 etc have a commonly understood meaning
as does 18-year old season, 19-year old season, etc

also, i don't really get the 'easier' part you mention, the only way you would know that player's draft-eligible and drafted seasons differ is by looking THAT up, so either way, you are looking up something

anyway, i think D+1 is actually quite useful, regardless of age.
After being drafted, the player, his coaches, teammates, opponents, will see him at least a bit differently, and how he responds can reflect how he progresses at higher levels with stiffer competition and accountability.

It's easier because birthdays require additional mental math. Not much, but a little. And I'm sure just about anyone here could tell you off the top of their head what year Patrice Bergeron was drafted in, probably what his birth date/year is.

 

[nyr2k2]

Has there been any official announcement re: Hajek and playing for Olomouc? I haven't seen anything official from Olomouc or really anything. I know the player himself said he'd be going there, but I didn't see anything from the team, and he's not listed on any rosters or anything. Hasn't played.

I noted the same thing with Brno and then a few days later it was reported he wasn't going there and instead would be going to Olomouc.

 

[Cag29]

I have a question. In the McDonough trade with Tampa was the 2019 2nd Robertson or Henriksson?
We also drafted Nils in the 2018 1st from that trade as well?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I have a question. In the McDonough trade with Tampa was the 2019 2nd Robertson or Henriksson?
We also drafted Nils in the 2018 1st from that trade as well?

Henriksson

Yes Nils was taken with the 1st from Tampa.

 

[cwede]

I have a question. In the McDonough trade with Tampa was the 2019 2nd Robertson or Henriksson?
We also drafted Nils in the 2018 1st from that trade as well?

At hockeydb you can find out yourself
Karl Henriksson Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Click Show Trades
2018-Feb-26 Draft pick rights traded from Tampa Bay Lightning with Libor Hajek, Brett Howden, Vladislav Namestnikov and round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Nils Lundkvist) to New York Rangers for Ryan McDonagh and J.T. Miller

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Lindbom saved 39 of 40 shots in a 4-1 win over Karlskoga. A .975 save percentage is definitely a nice result for him. They play them again tomorrow, but Lindbom will probably be the backup for that one

 

[Fitzy]

I certainly considered Henriksson a serious longshot pick, but it's good that he has shown positively so far. It's still a big uphill battle for a player like that to make the NHL

 

[nyr2k2]

Lindbom saved 39 of 40 shots in a 4-1 win over Karlskoga. A .975 save percentage is definitely a nice result for him. They play them again tomorrow, but Lindbom will probably be the backup for that one

Good performance, hopefully he can do it when the games count, and also not get injured for half the season.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Lundkvist (27) and Lindbom (30) in the early games in Sweden today.

 

[rangers1314]

Is there hope for Lindbom yet?

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Is there hope for Lindbom yet?

For a 20-year old goalie? Yes.

 

[kovazub94]

For a 20-year old goalie? Yes.

It’s not his problem that some on the board resent that he’s been taken in the second round. The talent is there. Got to stay healthy.

 

[Heckler81]

It’s not his problem that some on the board resent that he’s been taken in the second round. The talent is there. Got to stay healthy.

I think Lindbom is like Igor and comes over when he’s 23. Lindbom still has another 2+ years of development before coming over.

 

[cwede]

Is there hope for Lindbom yet?

Rush to judgement is fun here at HFB,
but i don't make conclusions about young players before they're into their 2d NHL contracts, or at least about age 23...
Yes its become more common than ever for SOME very young players to establish themselves at highest levels,
but still true that there are various paths players follow to becoming established pro players

 

[Leetch3]

It’s not his problem that some on the board resent that he’s been taken in the second round. The talent is there. Got to stay healthy.

I also think for most people the reaction was about taking a goalie in that spot, nothing personally against him. if we still had multiple 2nds or he was taken in the 3rd round or later I think the reaction would have been much different.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I also think for most people the reaction was about taking a goalie in that spot, nothing personally against him. if we still had multiple 2nds or he was taken in the 3rd round or later I think the reaction would have been much different.

Goalie is the easiest position to fill, and the least valuable in a draft. It's basically like a kicker or punter in football. The difference between an elite and good goalie/punter is not nearly as big as a center, winger, D-man/QB, RB, WR, TE etc.

You can find a good goalie in the 4th and later much easier than finding a good center, winger or D-man. For that reason alone I would never draft a goalie in the first two rounds. Teams win with good goalies all the time. You don't need elite goaltending. You need elite defense and elite 2-way play from your forwards. Use your picks for positions you cannot fill later on.

Also, best case scenario he turns into a good goalie and is worth maybe a 2nd round pick. There's nothing to gain here. That is why I had a problem with the pick, but that's not because of Lindbom. It has nothing to do with him.