Prospect Info: Robert Thomas (20th overall in 2017)

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
7,811
8,138
Lots of salt grains can be tossed around. Fans can hold the bags full of want but I think their expectations are going to fall far short if and when Patches is dealt.

To me there's no trade for Patches that makes sense for the Blues.
I'd be shocked if Patches gets moved for much more than we got for Oshie - good player with similar term, good (not great) prospect + pick (probably not a 1st unless you subtract the prospect).
 

BangarangxRufio

I Blues'd Myself
Nov 29, 2016
2,855
2,065
STL
for those not subscribed to The Athletic. Basically
they are Ed and Fabs 2.0 they text and hang out all the time.
Both want to be up next year and others see it likely
Army is getting tons of calls on our "big 4"
 

The Note

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 13, 2011
8,917
7,556
KCMO
297.png


I hate that calling the forward prospects “The Big 4” has caught on. I understand it’s a quick easy way to refer to that group but it’s just so cringey to me. That’s my old man complaint, don’t mind me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkOut

Majorityof1

Registered User
Mar 6, 2014
8,260
6,792
Central Florida
297.png


I hate that calling the forward prospects “The Big 4” has caught on. I understand it’s a quick easy way to refer to that group but it’s just so cringey to me. That’s my old man complaint, don’t mind me.

Completely agree. Its also so transitory. Dunn is not part of the Big 4 because he graduated, but is right there with them. Barbashev would have been but struggled and thus dropped out. Same with Walman. Will Tage be part of the Big 4 is he can cement his roster spot? Do we change it to the big 3? Also how big is big? As pumped as we are, this is not Matthews, Marner and Nylander. That's a big 3. The hype we have surrounding the "Big 4" is getting out of hand. Where does a player have to fall in national prospect rankings to be considered "Big"? Keep in mind that the Blues intentionally hyped the Oshie/Berglund/Perron group and it backfired in some way when they didn't live up to the hype, even though each one being a solid NHLer is actually a great track record for where they were picked. But hyping them as the next big thing creates expectations they may not be able to fill. We have no guarantees any of them will be able to carve a long term NHL career. Not Thomas who seems to check all the boxes, nor Kyrou who has elite speed, nor Thompson who is playing in the NHL has proven they will be a long-term success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Note

The Note

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 13, 2011
8,917
7,556
KCMO
I agree, they hype part also factored into it with me. Calling them a “Big 4” implies this is a franchise defining group of players to me, this is the new core. Now, it could be if all 4 of them become good NHL players. But I think we all agree the odds are heavily stacked against that. I just feel in general the cart is getting out in front of the horse quite a bit with the prospects on this board and calling them by any sort of nickname exasperates that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluesnatic27

Vincenzo Arelliti

He Can't Play Center
Oct 13, 2014
9,363
3,854
Lisle, IL
Completely agree. Its also so transitory. Dunn is not part of the Big 4 because he graduated, but is right there with them. Barbashev would have been but struggled and thus dropped out. Same with Walman. Will Tage be part of the Big 4 is he can cement his roster spot? Do we change it to the big 3? Also how big is big? As pumped as we are, this is not Matthews, Marner and Nylander. That's a big 3. The hype we have surrounding the "Big 4" is getting out of hand. Where does a player have to fall in national prospect rankings to be considered "Big"? Keep in mind that the Blues intentionally hyped the Oshie/Berglund/Perron group and it backfired in some way when they didn't live up to the hype, even though each one being a solid NHLer is actually a great track record for where they were picked. But hyping them as the next big thing creates expectations they may not be able to fill. We have no guarantees any of them will be able to carve a long term NHL career. Not Thomas who seems to check all the boxes, nor Kyrou who has elite speed, nor Thompson who is playing in the NHL has proven they will be a long-term success.
It was a term used by JR, and I believe, DA, in The Athletic. It's to distinguish them from the rest of our prospects easily, and they are the ones we are constantly getting calls about. JR also refers to them as blue chip prospects, but I disagree with him there.

But I agree, no names because things change, big is relative, and everyone here seems to be thinking that Thomas, Kyrou, Thompson, and Kostin are all for-sure top line players in the realm of Marner, Nylander, and Matthews. :sarcasm:

Personally, I think Thompson is a 2RW projection, Thomas projects as a top-6 C with question marks to his offense, and both Kyrou and Kostin are 2RWers if they pan out. All have more upside than that, but that's where I view them, and I think that's pretty rational. Also, I've never been as big on Walman and Barbashev. Walman is good, and I think he will project as a #4/3 at best, but Barbashev has always looked like a decent to good 3C to me.
 
Last edited:

Reality Czech

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
4,893
7,800
297.png


I hate that calling the forward prospects “The Big 4” has caught on. I understand it’s a quick easy way to refer to that group but it’s just so cringey to me. That’s my old man complaint, don’t mind me.

Oops, I just used that exact term in another thread. Guess I should have read this one first. :sarcasm:

I just used it out of convenience, but yeah I see what you're saying. I guess calling them the "Core Four" would be going too far?
 

Majorityof1

Registered User
Mar 6, 2014
8,260
6,792
Central Florida
Just call them the Top 4 as in Top 4 prospects.

They are not my Top 4. Kyrou isn't even in my top 6. I don't think its very clear cut at all to call it a top 4. Assuming Dunn graduated, I'd rank them.....

1) Thomas
2) Husso
3a) Thompson
3b) Barbashev (really close)
5a) Kostin
5 b) Walma (Also real close)
7a) Kyrou
7b) Blais

However, people forget that Blais is over PPG in the AHL, and actually has more p/60 than Thompson in the NHL. He would probably be on the team if he was a RH RW, but Thompson is, and hence is playing because he fills that need. Barbashev actually had better point production and defense than Thompson in his stint last year with much less favorable usage. He has struggled some this year (although I haven't seen what coaches obviously did compared to guys like MPS/Sundqvist). Still players have growing pains, and there are no guarantees Thompson won't as well. I give the slight edge to Thompson because he is younger and Barbashev has lingering consistency issues that this season hasn't helped. But its not cut and dry. Walman has all the skating skill as Kyrou and his shot is as much an asset as Kyrou's passing. So we can't discount him due to struggling defensively. He can definitely improve in that area, as this is his first year against professionals. Kyrou will have a very similar issue when he hits the AHL/NHL. I HATE his game without the puck. He will have a hard reality check when the skill gap shrinks if he doesn't learn to play more of a team game. He can learn, but if someone gave me even odds on the over/under of him playing 160 NHL games (2 full seasons), I'd pick the under. I wouldn't bet my house, but if forced to choose, I think he's going to bust.

Let's call them the "Shiny New Toys" or "Shinies" for short. They are all 20 or younger and drafted within the last 2 years. That is what sets them apart.
 

BleedBlue14

UrGeNcY
Feb 9, 2017
6,077
4,556
St. Louis
They are not my Top 4. Kyrou isn't even in my top 6. I don't think its very clear cut at all to call it a top 4. Assuming Dunn graduated, I'd rank them.....

1) Thomas
2) Husso
3a) Thompson
3b) Barbashev (really close)
5a) Kostin
5 b) Walma (Also real close)
7a) Kyrou
7b) Blais

However, people forget that Blais is over PPG in the AHL, and actually has more p/60 than Thompson in the NHL. He would probably be on the team if he was a RH RW, but Thompson is, and hence is playing because he fills that need. Barbashev actually had better point production and defense than Thompson in his stint last year with much less favorable usage. He has struggled some this year (although I haven't seen what coaches obviously did compared to guys like MPS/Sundqvist). Still players have growing pains, and there are no guarantees Thompson won't as well. I give the slight edge to Thompson because he is younger and Barbashev has lingering consistency issues that this season hasn't helped. But its not cut and dry. Walman has all the skating skill as Kyrou and his shot is as much an asset as Kyrou's passing. So we can't discount him due to struggling defensively. He can definitely improve in that area, as this is his first year against professionals. Kyrou will have a very similar issue when he hits the AHL/NHL. I HATE his game without the puck. He will have a hard reality check when the skill gap shrinks if he doesn't learn to play more of a team game. He can learn, but if someone gave me even odds on the over/under of him playing 160 NHL games (2 full seasons), I'd pick the under. I wouldn't bet my house, but if forced to choose, I think he's going to bust.

Let's call them the "Shiny New Toys" or "Shinies" for short. They are all 20 or younger and drafted within the last 2 years. That is what sets them apart.


The main reason I don't agree with you in saying Kyrou isn't in our top 5 is mainly due to Kyrou's explosiveness skating and ability to be a playmaker at a high pace. You see in the league now the young guys that have another gear to them are exceeding. (Examples mainly McDavid, Barzal, Boeser (although he's got a phenomenal shot and his explosiveness is mainly in a quick first step to create some space), Keller etc.). Regardless, what I'm trying to say is the young guys that have that explosive first couple of steps are excelling. I saw that from Kyrou in the WJC a few of his goals really highlight it. It's tough to give up on that honestly, we lack it sorely now that Tarasenko doesn't want to do it anymore and would rather try and pick corners albeit he's taking much longer to decide to now. You saw the same from Nylander/Marner last year.

I don't necessarily see that out of any of our other prospects (Thomas is borderline but nonetheless I still would peg him as our top prospect due to his two way play and him being sound for the center position, side note watched a film and London had Thomas play defense on the PK that has to say something about his defensive ability although I don't think anyone doubted it.). Thompson has a unique skill set in size and hands so that's a good thing to keep around as well. Kostin is a pretty good skater but I don't necessarily see the vision at the high pace. Barbashev is a solid player, seems to be more of a sound player as opposed to unique which is perfectly fine for the 3rd line. Blais is a bit interesting as he still has some time to mature and has scored at a high clip in the A, I just don't think I've seen enough of his tape to make a full judgement on him.

What I'm getting at is i'm straying further and further away from being okay with trading Kyrou after watching Barzal light up the league. I know these two as players are probably not the best comparison but at the same time it's the explosive first step and acceleration along with vision and playmaking ability that I'm looking at here.

To go along with that, I see us being serious serious contenders if JT were to somehow hit the UFA market with the amount of ELC's that we can actually play at the NHL level in the next couple of years, that is another reason I'm sure DA has kept in mind. Although we all know it's a pipe dream.
 

Majorityof1

Registered User
Mar 6, 2014
8,260
6,792
Central Florida
That was MY personal top rankings, which I in no way think should be the de facto rankings. I completely understand why someone might rank Kyrou higher. Its completely subjective and comes down to preferences and risk aversion. I am not too interested in a trade at all, even for Kyrou, unless we are getting good value. So I wasn't arguing that we should trade Kyrou or not. I was only arguing that calling them the Big 4 or top 4 or anything of the sort ignores our other older prospects who might not have the same ceilings but also have much safer floors. Sure, some people might have them top 4, but saying they are clear cut top 4 comes down to hype and recency bias when we have a pretty good batch of youngsters, each with their own assets and issues.

As to the players you mentioned, I feel they all have a much more complete game. They may not be defensive dynamos, but they have higher compete levels and better scoring touch/shots. Kyrou has skating/vision and passing. But his compete level is sub 50% from what I have seen.
 

67Blues

Got it for Bobby
Mar 22, 2013
4,551
4,894
Section 111
I'd reserve having Husso that high until we can see what he does under a team that the Blues control for a year and can give him the starts/load he needs while working with our own coaches. I suspect he will be very good and the future, but until we see him put together a season of goal tending with 2500-3000 minutes or so, I'm taking a wait and see attitude on him.

I see two different levels of prospects. The prospects that are new and shiny, still playing in the juniors/college levels generate a lot of excitement and anticipation of what could be. The other level of prospects are those that we have in our farm system that have a year or two of development within the Blues organization and we pretty much have a decent idea of where they will slot and what they bring to the table. Those guys are on a waiting game to clear out slots at the big club or be used as trade fodder.
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,027
12,733
I don't have a problem calling them top 4 or big 4, because it is an easy short hand when discussing trades. Rank our prospects however you want in terms of who is the 'best'. In terms of trade value, it just doesn't matter. Husso might be our best prospect, but goalie prospects carry little to no trade value because they are so damn hard to predict and every organization has a couple goalie prospects that 'could' be the guy in the future. Similarly, older prospects who are working their way through the AHL or playing sheltered minutes in the NHL without massive production just don't have much trade value. For better or worse, A 21 year old on track to hit his target development just doesn't have the same trade value as a 19 year old who is still crushing lower competition. Even if you think Barby is a better prospect than Kyrou, no NHL team is asking for Barby instead of Kyrou as the basis of a trade.

I don't think the Blues are marketing these players anything like they did with Bergie/Oshie/Perron. Casual fans have little to no expectations or even knowledge about these 4 guys. Fans who could name all 4 of the prospects are in the vast minority of the fanbase overall. I'm really only seeing them referred to as the big 4 in trade speculation, so I don't think it is creating unrealistic expectations.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->