Sens Board Prospect Rankings 2015 (6th)

[Boud]

that strategy might of worked back in the 90's when many teams did not scout/scout well any European leagues. now that is not the case (specially when the 2 players in question played in the QMJHL).

if the sens honestly traded up then drafted a guy who was not at the top of their list i'd seriously question managements drafting processes. i under stand the idea of drafting a guy you have lower if you are sure you can get the higher guy within a few spots but that was not the case here. we traded up to get Gagne and then had to wait 12 spots to get Chlapik. any of those 12 teams could of easily drafted him or traded there pick to someone who wanted him. our choice to trade up for Gagne then wait 12 spots for Chlapik shows we clearly think Gagne is a better prospect.

Chlapik might of been ranked 18th(NA skaters) but something made him fall 30(ish) spots and i doubt it was teams not know anything about him.

To be fair, pretty much every Centre that was drafted before Chlapik we're all ranked higher than him or in the same range excluding Mitchell Stephens who shot up the rankings after his impressive U18 WJC. Eriksson Ek, White, Konecny, Roslovic, Harkins we're all solid bets to go in the first and then Forsbacka-Karlsson who's on par with Chlapik IMO. If we'd have grabbed any of these guys with the 48 pick I would've been more than happy. The next centre picked after him was Trenin, same production as Chlapik in the Q and again just as good as Chlapik so really there's no surprise as to where we Chlapiked him.

You can't compare his NA ranking (18th), not only without the Euros but also without the goalies and then you take in consideration team needs and you end up with good players going a little later than ranked, which is completely normal. FC had him ranked 35th, he 39th on TSN, Mckeen didn't have him the top 30

 

[spader]

The guy who should have went 4 or 5 at the latest O'Connor...

There are so many guys that are close.

 

[caymanmew]

To be fair, pretty much every Centre that was drafted before Chlapik we're all ranked higher than him or in the same range excluding Mitchell Stephens who shot up the rankings after his impressive U18 WJC. Eriksson Ek, White, Konecny, Roslovic, Harkins we're all solid bets to go in the first and then Forsbacka-Karlsson who's on par with Chlapik IMO. If we'd have grabbed any of these guys with the 48 pick I would've been more than happy. The next centre picked after him was Trenin, same production as Chlapik in the Q and again just as good as Chlapik so really there's no surprise as to where we Chlapiked him.

You can't compare his NA ranking (18th), not only without the Euros but also without the goalies and then you take in consideration team needs and you end up with good players going a little later than ranked, which is completely normal. FC had him ranked 35th, he 39th on TSN, Mckeen didn't have him the top 30

i did not bring up the 18th ranking someone else arguing for him did. and i put 30ish to try and take into account the Euros and goalies.

 

[BondraTime]

we are getting close to picks Gagne and Chlapik and i think it is a good time to remind people the sens drafted Gagne before Chlapik for a reason. unless you can find a real reason why Chlapik value has gone above Gagne in the last month he should not be ahead of him in the ratings.

I'm certain the Sens had Chlapik higher than Gagne, or at the worst equal.

It just happens that the Sens were privy to information that Gagne was going to be taken by Colorado just before their pick. It was either get him at 36, or miss him 100%.

Chlapik had a chance, which happened, of falling to 48. Gagne had 0% chance

 

[Hale The Villain]

You don't trade up to draft a player if he's not ranked a lot higher than where you have the chance to select him. A top 5 scouting staff in the league thought highly enough of Gagne to sacrifice a 3rd round pick just to move up 6 spots to select him. Considering he was the team's 36th overall pick, wouldn't shock me if he was close to 20th on our draft list.

 

[BondraTime]

You don't trade up to draft a player if he's not ranked a lot higher than where you have the chance to select him. A top 5 scouting staff in the league thought highly enough of Gagne to sacrifice a 3rd round pick just to move up 6 spots to select him. Considering he was the team's 36th overall pick, wouldn't shock me if he was close to 20th on our draft list.

Agreed. I believe they got 4 guys ranked in their top 30

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

You don't trade up to draft a player if he's not ranked a lot higher than where you have the chance to select him. A top 5 scouting staff in the league thought highly enough of Gagne to sacrifice a 3rd round pick just to move up 6 spots to select him. Considering he was the team's 36th overall pick, wouldn't shock me if he was close to 20th on our draft list.

they said they moved up because colorado was going to take him maybe they actually had him ranked behind chlapik but knew they could get chlapik later. Not saying thats the case and it might be unlikely but i dont think draft status means a ton. Maybe they had White ahead of Chabot but Chabot probably was going to be taken very soon. The sens might not have wanted to take the risk that a team would want a dman around pick 20

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

Went with Freddie C.

Add Baillargeon.

 

[caymanmew]

they said they moved up because colorado was going to take him maybe they actually had him ranked behind chlapik but knew they could get chlapik later. Not saying thats the case and it might be unlikely but i dont think draft status means a ton. Maybe they had White ahead of Chabot but Chabot probably was going to be taken very soon. The sens might not have wanted to take the risk that a team would want a dman around pick 20

the difference is Chabot to White is 3 picks Gagne to Chlapik is 12. if Chlapik is ranked higher then Gagne you don't risk that he might be there in 12 picks you take the BPA

 

[Caeldan]

Even though I went O'Connor last time, thinking about it this time I think I like Gagne in the #6 spot... mostly on the hope he fills out to play the style of game he likes to play. Because if he does, we've got ourselves at least a Holmstrom.

 

[BondraTime]

the difference is Chabot to White is 3 picks Gagne to Chlapik is 12. if Chlapik is ranked higher then Gagne you don't risk that he might be there in 12 picks you take the BPA

If you have two prospects rated very close, but you know a team is 100% taking one of the guys before your first pick, what would you do?

By not trading up to get Gagne you have a large chance to not get either one of Gagne or Chlapik.

If Colorado were planning on taking Chlapik, we likely would have traded up for him, and rolled the dice on Gagne dropping to 48. I was told teasm knew that Pitts weren't going to pass on Sprong if he fell to them, and Colorado were planning on taking Gagne and Meloche with their picks.

 

[BigBush*]

Voted Gagne. Not sure if Wikstrand will be an NHL regular but I'm pretty sure Gagne will be

 

[Lazarrr]

I think the top 6 prospects are all interchangeable. I'd take Lindberg 7th.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

I think the top 6 prospects are all interchangeable. I'd take Lindberg 7th.

Yeah the top six are pretty unanimous but could all shuffle around a lot from poster to poster.

I'd personally have them like so,

Chabot
Puempel
Paul
Prince
White
O'Connor

Prince and Paul are interchangeable.

#7 is where it gets very interesting. I have a feeling there's gonna be a lot of votes split 4 ways. Gagne, Chlapik, Wikstrand and Lindberg. Seems like Gagne is the conventional choice with the organisation being extremely high on him but we have some posters really liking Chlapik and a big contingent of people who think Lindberg is a very high end prospect. Then there's Wikstrand who has the best resume.

Those four seem like the 2nd tier of our prospect pool.

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

I kinda think O'Connor is being overhyped. At least i dont feel confident enough have him this early. He could very easily change my opinion with stellar play at the AHL level

 

[Emerica]

I'm going with Lindberg at 7th.

 

[Boud]

I kinda think O'Connor is being overhyped. At least i dont feel confident enough have him this early. He could very easily change my opinion with stellar play at the AHL level

Same here. Guy was good in Boston but nothing to knock your socks off. Other goalies we're better than him, he was the 3rd best goalie in the frozen 4 and made some monumental mistakes this season. If he wasn't 6'5'', I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be that much hype over him as other guys had similar numbers and didn't even get a Dev. camp invite from a NHL team. The guy was in camp a couple years ago and we didn't keep him, he's definitely not in our top 5 prospects.

I assume that most people who are voting for him have not seen him play this season and are looking at numbers only. He was playing on the best team by a mile with Eichel. Again, he's good but if he wasn't 6'5'', I don't think there would be any hype. It's tough to gauge a guy that has never played a single AHL game yet at 23 years old.

 

[stempniaksen]

I'm going with Lindberg at 7th.

Ya, gotta agree with you here.

Some combination of Gagne/Chlapik/Wikstrand/Claesson in behind him to round out the top-eleven.

 

[Micklebot]

Same here. Guy was good in Boston but nothing to knock your socks off. Other goalies we're better than him, he was the 3rd best goalie in the frozen 4 and made some monumental mistakes this season. If he wasn't 6'5'', I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be that much hype over him as other guys had similar numbers and didn't even get a Dev. camp invite from a NHL team. The guy was in camp a couple years ago and we didn't keep him, he's definitely not in our top 5 prospects.

I assume that most people who are voting for him have not seen him play this season and are looking at numbers only. He was playing on the best team by a mile with Eichel. Again, he's good but if he wasn't 6'5'', I don't think there would be any hype. It's tough to gauge a guy that has never played a single AHL game yet at 23 years old.

Was it even an option at the time? I mean, he may have already committed to the university at that point. Aside from that, goalies can do a lot of developing in a couple years, not really sure dev camp from a couple years ago is meaningful.

 

[spader]

Same here. Guy was good in Boston but nothing to knock your socks off. Other goalies we're better than him, he was the 3rd best goalie in the frozen 4 and made some monumental mistakes this season. If he wasn't 6'5'', I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be that much hype over him as other guys had similar numbers and didn't even get a Dev. camp invite from a NHL team. The guy was in camp a couple years ago and we didn't keep him, he's definitely not in our top 5 prospects.

I assume that most people who are voting for him have not seen him play this season and are looking at numbers only. He was playing on the best team by a mile with Eichel. Again, he's good but if he wasn't 6'5'', I don't think there would be any hype. It's tough to gauge a guy that has never played a single AHL game yet at 23 years old.

Meh. If Chara was 5'2'', he wouldn't be the same player either. I don't really see your point. If McDavid was bad at hockey, he also wouldn't be getting the same hype.