Prospect Info: Rangers ranked #1 by The Athletic

[GeorgeKaplan]

Pronman ranked goalie prospects; Shesterkin is 3rd behind Thatcher Demko and Spencer Knight.

Garbage take, imo.

 

[mas0764]

No Lundkvist is a big miss imo

So is no Shesterkin and Robertson.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

No Lundkvist is a big miss imo

It's Pronman.

 

[Raspewtin]

even weirder than Shesterkin at 3 was Sorokin at 7. Wow.

He seems to be of firm belief that all KHL sv%s are inflated.

So is no Shesterkin and Robertson.

Goalies were on their own list.

 

[Rangers in 7]

Jesus just went through pronmans individual player rankings....I mean what a load of crap. Kravtsov, Fox, k’Andre all wayyyyy too low. Nils not even making the list, Robertson not not making it. Someone counted players by team and it makes no sense at all

View media item 5947
He has this per teams prospects and that doesn’t correlate at all to his team rankings. Only 4 rangers in the top 124.....nhl network had 5 rangers in the top 50.....idiot

 

[iamitter]

Jesus just went through pronmans individual player rankings....I mean what a load of crap. Kravtsov, Fox, k’Andre all wayyyyy too low. Nils not even making the list, Robertson not not making it. Someone counted players by team and it makes no sense at all

View media item 5947
He has this per teams prospects and that doesn’t correlate at all to his team rankings. Only 4 rangers in the top 124.....nhl network had 5 rangers in the top 50.....idiot

Heavens forbid there's some disagreement from the herd mentality.

He had us ranked as the #1 prospect pool. Yes, he has a tendency to rate certain players a certain way, but he bases his rankings on things he gets to see. Intl. tourneys are high, he generally sees a handful of games and then video watches the rest. He often gives a better breakdown of skill/speed/etc the way a professional NHL scout would. This is better than we basically get from any other source.

I bet most of the hot takes in threads like these are from people who watch these prospects much less than he does. They watch 2 games and declare him an idiot.

Is he unlikely to find the next Hampus Lindholm? Yes. But I trust him more than most to find boom/bust prospects like Gaudreau or Kucherov. When he's wrong about a prospect, he updates what he writes and admits he was wrong. He did so about K'andre Miller and many others. And others he was high on, he downgraded, like Bokk.

Honestly, what do people think happens in most of these scouting circles we see? It's the same old rankings +/- a couple spots, which isn't how real life works in teams. You guys think we thought Kravtsov was the second best forward in the 2018 draft 'cause we watched every minute of his play? I would bet the Rangers scouting staff placed a ludicrous amount of value on what they saw in the KHL playoffs.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Meh, Pronman’s a hot take artist who shouted his way to relevance on Twitter.

If he actually wanted to get things right, he’d have a team of people to split up the work. In watching everyone (if he even does that) he spreads himself too thin to have a real understanding of anyone and finds himself in the ‘Jack Of All, Master Of None’ area

 

[Rangers in 7]

Heavens forbid there's some disagreement from the herd mentality.

He had us ranked as the #1 prospect pool. Yes, he has a tendency to rate certain players a certain way, but he bases his rankings on things he gets to see. Intl. tourneys are high, he generally sees a handful of games and then video watches the rest. He often gives a better breakdown of skill/speed/etc the way a professional NHL scout would. This is better than we basically get from any other source.

I bet most of the hot takes in threads like these are from people who watch these prospects much less than he does. They watch 2 games and declare him an idiot.

Is he unlikely to find the next Hampus Lindholm? Yes. But I trust him more than most to find boom/bust prospects like Gaudreau or Kucherov. When he's wrong about a prospect, he updates what he writes and admits he was wrong. He did so about K'andre Miller and many others. And others he was high on, he downgraded, like Bokk.

Honestly, what do people think happens in most of these scouting circles we see? It's the same old rankings +/- a couple spots, which isn't how real life works in teams. You guys think we thought Kravtsov was the second best forward in the 2018 draft 'cause we watched every minute of his play? I would bet the Rangers scouting staff placed a ludicrous amount of value on what they saw in the KHL playoffs.

You completely missed my biggest criticism of his entire rankings....

The rangers in his opinion had 4 players in the top 124 how in God’s name could he rank them as the best prospect pool in the league.

It’s either one or the other it can’t be both

The wings have SEVEN prospects in the top 124 yet are 13th in pool rankings
Ottawa has 6 and only ranks 12th
Tampa has 5 and is ranked 23rd

Yet in his opinion the rangers have only 4 and are ranked # 2, 21, 39, 48

 

[kovazub94]

You completely missed my biggest criticism of his entire rankings....

The rangers in his opinion had 4 players in the top 124 how in God’s name could he rank them as the best prospect pool in the league.

It’s either one or the other it can’t be both

The wings have SEVEN prospects in the top 124 yet are 13th in pool rankings
Ottawa has 6 and only ranks 12th
Tampa has 5 and is ranked 23rd

Yet in his opinion the rangers have only 4 and are ranked # 2, 21, 39, 48

The only way it makes sense is if prospects ranked in 50-124 are completely irrelevant.

 

[iamitter]

You completely missed my biggest criticism of his entire rankings....

The rangers in his opinion had 4 players in the top 124 how in God’s name could he rank them as the best prospect pool in the league.

It’s either one or the other it can’t be both

The wings have SEVEN prospects in the top 124 yet are 13th in pool rankings
Ottawa has 6 and only ranks 12th
Tampa has 5 and is ranked 23rd

Yet in his opinion the rangers have only 4 and are ranked # 2, 21, 39, 48

He explained that? He very highly values upside as do many of us. Would you trade Kakko for Fox and Miller? If not, that #2 prospect is worth more than the 39 and 48.

It's in his methodology. Prospect valuations are done exponentially. He assigned a valuation to each tier of prospect and the rangers had the highest score overall. It's not rocket science.

 

[Edge]

It's Pronman.

It’s weird how sometimes I feel like he’s spot on.

Then it’s like he has a seizure and I’m left wondering what the hell direction he’s going. It’s like the guy who makes a spectacular, game-saving diving catch and then has the next ball bounce off his face.

 

[Rangers in 7]

He explained that? He very highly values upside as do many of us. Would you trade Kakko for Fox and Miller? If not, that #2 prospect is worth more than the 39 and 48.

It's in his methodology. Prospect valuations are done exponentially. He assigned a valuation to each tier of prospect and the rangers had the highest score overall. It's not rocker science.

That’s not really organizational rankings then...because if in his opinion the next ranger on the list is at 200 then really that makes no sense

Agree to disagree on this then because pronman imo isn’t a great talent evaluator

 

[Alluckks]

It’s weird how sometimes I feel like he’s spot on.

Then it’s like he has a seizure and I’m left wondering what the hell direction he’s going. It’s like the guy who makes a spectacular, game-saving diving catch and then has the next ball hit to him bounce off his face.

He definitely has some really good pieces and can do really well with some prospects. But it feels like he can really miss on prospects that aren't North American based unless they were very hyped going into the draft. He also has a major recency bias, as in the most recently drafted players tend to get preference, for arbitrary reasons.

 

[UnSandvich]

He definitely has some really good pieces and can do really well with some prospects. But it feels like he can really miss on prospects that aren't North American based unless they were very hyped going into the draft. He also has a major recency bias, as in the most recently drafted players tend to get preference, for arbitrary reasons.

You mean like how Kravtsov is behind guys like Podkolzin, Broberg, and Kaliyev?

 

[Edge]

He definitely has some really good pieces and can do really well with some prospects. But it feels like he can really miss on prospects that aren't North American based unless they were very hyped going into the draft. He also has a major recency bias, as in the most recently drafted players tend to get preference, for arbitrary reasons.

Everyone has bias in them, despite his or her best efforts.

But recency bias always came off as lazy to me. It's always driven me nuts.

 

[nyr2k2]

ESPN/Chris Peters did his Top 100:

#2 Kakko
#21 Kravtsov
#37 Miller
#40 Fox
#58 Shesterkin
#99 Robertson

https://www.espn.com/nhl/insider/story/_/id/27632023/ranking-top-100-nhl-prospects-2019-20

Only the Kings had more prospects in the Top 100, with 7. The Oilers also had 6. Boston had 1 and Pittsburgh had 0 (LOL).

Criteria was no more than 25 games played last season or 50 total, and 25 or under.

 

[Ghost of jas]

ESPN/Chris Peters did his Top 100:

#2 Kakko
#21 Kravtsov
#37 Miller
#40 Fox
#58 Shesterkin
#99 Robertson

https://www.espn.com/nhl/insider/story/_/id/27632023/ranking-top-100-nhl-prospects-2019-20

Only the Kings had more prospects in the Top 100, with 7. The Oilers also had 6. Boston had 1 and Pittsburgh had 0 (LOL).

Criteria was no more than 25 games played last season of 50 total, and 25 or under.

Nice, but Lundkvist getting no love disappoints me.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

ESPN/Chris Peters did his Top 100:

#2 Kakko
#21 Kravtsov
#37 Miller
#40 Fox
#58 Shesterkin
#99 Robertson

https://www.espn.com/nhl/insider/story/_/id/27632023/ranking-top-100-nhl-prospects-2019-20

Only the Kings had more prospects in the Top 100, with 7. The Oilers also had 6. Boston had 1 and Pittsburgh had 0 (LOL).

Criteria was no more than 25 games played last season of 50 total, and 25 or under.

Kravtsov’s list-to-list rankings are fascinating to me. It feels like he’s done enough to be widely considered a high end guy, but not enough to quiet some boom-or-bust questions for a decent amount of people

 

[Edge]

Kravtsov’s list-to-list rankings are fascinating to me. It feels like he’s done enough to be widely considered a high end guy, but not enough to quiet some boom-or-bust questions for a decent amount of people

I think there's a general consensus that Kravtsov is a legit first line prospect.

The question is whether he's a top-end first line player, an all-star, an elite but not quite franchise player, etc. etc. etc. And that's where you might see him in someone's top 10, as compared to the teens or the early 20s.

I'm in agreement with Peters in the sense that I have Miller ahead of Fox, which isn't necessarily the majority opinion.

Interesting to see Robertson in the top 100. I didn't expect to see anyone have him there at this particular point in time.

 

[Levitate]

He explained that? He very highly values upside as do many of us. Would you trade Kakko for Fox and Miller? If not, that #2 prospect is worth more than the 39 and 48.

It's in his methodology. Prospect valuations are done exponentially. He assigned a valuation to each tier of prospect and the rangers had the highest score overall. It's not rocket science.

He highly highly, almost absurdly, values the top prospects like Hughes and Kakko compared to everyone else. I don't think he's super high on the rest of the Rangers prospects but he acknowledges that they have good depth, but he's very high on Kakko.
Similar with his Devils rankings, he ranked them high overall because of how absurdly high he values Hughes, but figures the rest of their pool is not nearly as good.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Nice, but Lundkvist getting no love disappoints me.

Let people sleep on him. How Robertson is ranked ahead of Lundkvist by people is beyond me

 

[Raspewtin]

Pronman did his ranking of teams by their u23 core. Rangers came in 17th.

This might be his worst ranking out of all of them. There are at least 5 teams ahead of the Rangers that shouldn't be.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Pronman did his ranking of teams by their u23 core. Rangers came in 17th.

This might be his worst ranking out of all of them. There are at least 5 teams ahead of the Rangers that shouldn't be.

Given his explanation for how he does his ranking, it actually does make sense. Basically, it comes down to players making significant contributions at the NHL level 23 and under. So, none of the prospects (and he reiterates that he has the team ranked #1) count, and guys like Andersson, Chytil, and Howden, who didn't add much value last year get evaluated based on that slight participation. Also, Buch graduates by turning 24.

Given the increased roles last year's kids'll have this year, plus guys like Kakko, Fox, one of the LD, and potentially Kravtsov playing meaningful minutes, the Rangers have a very good chance to be the year's biggest risers.

 

[mas0764]

Don’t know if this was discussed elsewhere but Pronman had us ranked a really disappointing 17th for a “23 and under core.” Despite having the #1 overall farm system. Not sure how that can be unless he’s giving massive bonus points to 22 year old already in the league, but whatever.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

I try not to be overly mean but Pronman has proven pretty convincingly to be a complete hack. No idea how he got the platform he has but I can respect the hustle.

 

[egelband]

Interesting and fun read. I'd think Lindbom should be one of the goalies by then, though. And no Zibanejad is a reasonable guess but he'll only be 30 then.