Prospect Info: Sens Board Prospects Ranking 2021 #3

[Xspyrit]

Remember to vote based on all factors and not just NHL readiness. Overall skillset, hockey IQ, upside potential vs floor, age, stats, skating ability, array of shots, leadership qualities, size/strenght, etc

Personally, I always ask myself, who would I draft BPA among these players?

Try to do some research on these kids, particularly the most recent ones. People are free to post links and videos about some of the prospects that should be voted soon, or even try to persuade others why a guy should be voted next! Spread info to help people vote.

Players from the 2020 top-30 that have graduated since (who are still with the organization) :

Drake Batherson, Tim Stutzle, Josh Norris


Sens Board Prospects Ranking 2021

(1)- Tim Stutzle (53 GP)
1- Jake Sanderson (94.8%)
(2)- Josh Norris (59 GP)
2- Shane Pinto (74.6%)
3-
4-
5-



As we have been doing since 2004, we are going to use the HF criterias for prospect eligibility (less than 65 NHL games and under 25 y/o)

NHL Prospect Criteria - Hockey's Future

However, this year there's going to be 2 exceptions to AVOID massive turmoil. Like SensBrawler said to me "It's a weird situation due to the shortened season. In most years, they would have easily graduated."

So Tim Stutzle (53 GP) and Josh Norris (59 GP) are going to be considered graduated. The panel of Sens prospect polls experts think that the majority of people would still consider Brannstrom as a prospect, even though he has more games than them (63 GP), so he's going to be among options.


Order of prospects to be added :

Benjamin Roger
Kevin Mandolese
Vitali Abramov
Oliver Johansson
Carson Latimer
Chandler Romeo
Philippe Daoust
Viktor Lodin
Maxence Guénette
Jonathan Aspirot
Parker Kelly
Cole Reinhardt
Mark Kastelic
Jakov Novak
Jonny Tychonick
Eric Engstrand
Luke Loheit


Also, leaving the link of pre-2017 polls if anyone wants to bookmark the page

2016 Senators Prospects Top 30 + Past Rankings

Click to read more...

 

[TheDebater]

I knew #3 was going to be more divisive, and it is a tough one, but for those of you voting Brannstrom, ask yourself this:

If you had to trade one of Boucher or Brannstrom away right now, who would you trade (regardless of the return)?

I am a big believer in Brannstrom, but I am not sure he is going to be more valuable to this team moving forward over Boucher.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I knew #3 was going to be more divisive, and it is a tough one, but for those of you voting Brannstrom, ask yourself this:

If you had to trade one of Boucher or Brannstrom away right now, who would you trade (regardless of the return)?

I am a big believer in Brannstrom, but I am not sure he is going to be more valuable to this team moving forward over Boucher.

I'd keep Boucher over Brannstrom pretty easily. I'd keep Formenton and Greig over him as well.

Brannstrom gets a lot of love around here so .. I don't expect a ton of agreement on that. I hope he finds another gear this year and proves me wrong but not holding my breath.

 

[Xspyrit]

I knew #3 was going to be more divisive, and it is a tough one, but for those of you voting Brannstrom, ask yourself this:

If you had to trade one of Boucher or Brannstrom away right now, who would you trade (regardless of the return)?

I am a big believer in Brannstrom, but I am not sure he is going to be more valuable to this team moving forward over Boucher.

ok but a reminder that when you evaluate prospects, you evaluate them as potential NHL players, not as potential Senators players only...

I mean Leevi Merilainen could end up being a perennial Vezina candidate and never play a game for Ottawa

Look no further than Chris Driedger for example. This is where we ranked him over the years. He played a total of 95 mins for Ottawa

2012 : 25th
2013 : 14th
2014 : 12th
2015 : 22nd
2016 : 17th
2017 : 16th

The question is : who do you think will be better at the NHL level? Brannstrom or Boucher? Or anyone else on that list?

I see there's still some confusion about these polls but how do you think more "official" sources make their NHL prospects rankings? Like this TSN list made in April :

Wings' blue chippers, Caufield headline Top 75 prospects list - TSN.ca

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

ok but a reminder that when you evaluate prospects, you evaluate them as potential NHL players, not as potential Senators players only...

I mean Leevi Merilainen could end up being a perennial Vezina candidate and never play a game for Ottawa

Look no further than Chris Driedger for example. This is where we ranked him over the years. He played a total of 95 mins for Ottawa

2012 : 25th
2013 : 14th
2014 : 12th
2015 : 22nd
2016 : 17th
2017 : 16th

The question is : who do you think will be better at the NHL level? Brannstrom or Boucher? Or anyone else on that list?

I see there's still some confusion about these polls but how do you think more "official" sources make their NHL prospects rankings? Like this TSN list made in April :

Wings' blue chippers, Caufield headline Top 75 prospects list - TSN.ca

but Caufield played in the NHL already

 

[Xspyrit]

Edit : regarding the TSN list

When I say criterias for "prospect eligibility" are all over the place, I mean it... Brannstrom is there, Norris and Stutzle aren't even though EB has more games. TSN doesn't even make the effort to state what are their criterias. The way people make their prospects lists is way too subjective

but Caufield played in the NHL already

Remember when Parker Kelly was a prospect? He really had a great career in that 1 GP

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

When I say criterias for "prospect eligibility" are all over the place, I mean it... Brannstrom is there, Norris and Stutzle aren't even though EB has more games. TSN doesn't even make the effort to state what are their criterias. The way people make their prospects lists is way too subjective


That being said, remember when Parker Kelly was a prospect? He really had a great career in that 1 GP

You thought I was serious? lol.. I thought we moved past that already.

Sanderson 7 isn't bad .. He could easily jump up as high as 3 imo.

Brannstrom at 19 is amazing .. especially looking at some of the names behind him.. We are looking at top 10 picks sitting behind him .... If he has that kind of value we should be using it.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Greig then Brannstrom

 

[OD99]

I knew #3 was going to be more divisive, and it is a tough one, but for those of you voting Brannstrom, ask yourself this:

If you had to trade one of Boucher or Brannstrom away right now, who would you trade (regardless of the return)?

I am a big believer in Brannstrom, but I am not sure he is going to be more valuable to this team moving forward over Boucher.

I think Bran quickly went from overrated to massively underrated when he didn't step in and take a job full time.

The progress has been steady, he plays an incredibly difficult position to do well in young and is still 21 (22 when season starts).

To me his play at the end of the season shows how badly we need defenders who can move the puck out themselves and he has such great offensive instincts that he will put up significant points this season.

 

[Xspyrit]

You thought I was serious? lol.. I thought we moved past that already.

Sanderson 7 isn't bad .. He could easily jump up as high as 3 imo.

Brannstrom at 19 is amazing .. especially looking at some of the names behind him.. We are looking at top 10 picks sitting behind him .... If he has that kind of value we should be using it.

I know lol, my Parker Kelly comment was more to continue on the same thought but I admit it doesn't work much after making a few serious sentences

I could have posted that above and it would have been less confusing, check the edit

And yeah, if GMs see Brannstrom having a value anywhere close to what everyone but Sens fans think, trade him asap!

 

[Tuna99]

Greig then Brannstrom

Grieg in the #3 spot and not even really close IMO

 

[jbeck5]

I know lol, my Parker Kelly comment was more to continue on the same thought but I admit it doesn't work much after making a few serious sentences

I could have posted that above and it would have been less confusing, check the edit

And yeah, if GMs see Brannstrom having a value anywhere close to what everyone but Sens fans think, trade him asap!

I'd rather just keep him and develop that asset. Whenever we've been good, we've had 2 good offensive defenseman whether that's Redden and Chara or Gonchar and Karlsson, we need to have atleast a couple threats for 40+ points from the back end. Brannstrom is that #2 to chabot. Why wouldn't we develop him if we'll just be looking for someone like him after we get rid of him.

Sanderson looks like a good 2 way minute muncher, but I don't know if he has elite offensive instincts. JBD and Sanderson both look like 2 way guys but I'm not sure either has 40-50 point potential. I see Sanderson as a 25 minute a night 35 point, very solid defensively. But we're still missing that #2 offensive guy If we get rid of brannstrom.

 

[SensontheRush]

I don't know how much I agree with having Formenton and Brannstrom on this list. Neither are going to play AHL games next year.

Gustavsson and Brown are still considered rookies, for example.

 

[PlayOn]

I was choosing between Gus, Greig and Boucher and went with Gus. If he’s a true #1, and I think he is, he’s an important piece.

 

[DrEasy]

It was between Greig and Gus for me. Went with Greig.

 

[TheDebater]

Grieg in the #3 spot and not even really close IMO

Care to explain why it's "not even really close"?

 

[Tuna99]

Care to explain why it's "not even really close"?

he’ll be the biggest impact longest term player on the team. Merilainen and Sogaard can be more impact but Greig to me looks like a JG Pegeau

 

[BondraTime]

Formenton until he’s in

 

[TheDebater]

Judging by how close the votes are after Brannstrom, poll #4 is going to be very interesting.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

On the Forms train

 

[Xspyrit]

I'd rather just keep him and develop that asset. Whenever we've been good, we've had 2 good offensive defenseman whether that's Redden and Chara or Gonchar and Karlsson, we need to have atleast a couple threats for 40+ points from the back end. Brannstrom is that #2 to chabot. Why wouldn't we develop him if we'll just be looking for someone like him after we get rid of him.

Sanderson looks like a good 2 way minute muncher, but I don't know if he has elite offensive instincts. JBD and Sanderson both look like 2 way guys but I'm not sure either has 40-50 point potential. I see Sanderson as a 25 minute a night 35 point, very solid defensively. But we're still missing that #2 offensive guy If we get rid of brannstrom.

Because that other guy will be 6'2+

Seriously, I don't know but a lot of use have this impression that he's not in the long term plans. Gotta ask these question directly to Sens management.

I don't know how much I agree with having Formenton and Brannstrom on this list. Neither are going to play AHL games next year.

Gustavsson and Brown are still considered rookies, for example.

Sorry but that logic doesn't work. If Owen Power makes the Sabres on opening night and never sees the AHL ice, does it mean he's not a prospect right now?

I believe Pinto won't ever play in the AHL, so he's not a prospect? What if 50% think like me and the other 50% think he'll be in the AHL, then how do you decides

How do you know Formenton and Brannstrom won't play AHL games next season? There's no guarantee. I have been wrong on these things before, even if it looked predictable

I'm not sure why some people are still trying to bring new "unique" subjective ideas, it just doesn't work in that kind of exercise. You have to be cartesian.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

Edit : regarding the TSN list

When I say criterias for "prospect eligibility" are all over the place, I mean it... Brannstrom is there, Norris and Stutzle aren't even though EB has more games. TSN doesn't even make the effort to state what are their criterias. The way people make their prospects lists is way too subjective



Remember when Parker Kelly was a prospect? He really had a great career in that 1 GP

Huh, imagine if we had a clear cut distinction like if X player has played in the NHL they're not considered a prospect anymore.
Maybe that would solve the issue...
Brannstrom is DEFINITELY NOT a prospect anymore. Come on guys.

 

[Xspyrit]

Huh, imagine if we had a clear cut distinction like if X player has played in the NHL they're not considered a prospect anymore.
Maybe that would solve the issue...
Brannstrom is DEFINITELY NOT a prospect anymore. Come on guys.

There's not going to be an ideal concensus, that's why a certain amount of NHL games makes the most sense. Something like 20-25 games is way too much of a small sample size, you need more. I like 41 GP as it is half of a season. I also liked HF criterias because through decades of following NHL prospects, this number is actually a very good indication of what you have in a player.

You must not like Brannstrom still being considered a prospect but look at TSN for example, they have him despite significantly more pro experience (and more NHL Games) than Norris and Stutzle, who are not on their list.

That being said, I'm sorry but 1 NHL GP = not prospect is the most ridiculous/foolish proposal I have seen for this

You'd be hard pressed to find 5 people that agree with it.

 

[SensontheRush]

...

I thought it was obvious through implication that players such as Pinto are fine since they are still considered rookies.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

There's not going to be an ideal concensus, that's why a certain amount of NHL games makes the most sense. Something like 20-25 games is way too much of a small sample size, you need more. I like 41 GP as it is half of a season. I also liked HF criterias because through decades of following NHL prospects, this number is actually a very good indication of what you have in a player.

That being said, I'm sorry but 1 NHL GP = not prospect is the most ridiculous/foolish proposal I have seen for this

You'd be hard pressed to find 5 people that agree with it.

At what point is a player not a prospect in that given scenario? They either a. hit 41 games and become 'not a prospect' or b. get 40 or less games and still are viewed as prospects. So Logan Brown (for example, there are plenty of others) who at ~30 games is still considered a prospect? When does it stop? At 25?27? Never?

You get drafted as a prospect. You make the NHL, you are now a young player. You do not belong on any prospect lists.
Our best prospect is Jake Sanderson, who has yet to make the prospect of playing in the NHL. He's our best prospect due to draft pedigree, gameplay, etc...

My rule takes away any arbitrary numbers. Column A - no NHL games = prospect. Column B - 1 NHL game = not a prospect.