Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info/Discussion Thread XIII

[spintheblackcircle]

pronman-world-junior-camp-takeaways-and-projected-rosters

Alexander Chmelevski, C, San Jose: When I watched Chmelevski in the OHL, he looked like a dynamic playmaker and someone who ran the 67’s offense. At this camp, he was put into a versatile and at times checking role, and to my surprise, he excelled at that. I can’t remember seeing him on the PK at any point before, but he was winning battles and making defensive plays while chipping in with some of his usual offensive creativity.

 

[hohosaregood]

He's a long-term guy. Scouts see him as a great athlete who still needs to learn the finer points of the game. I see flashes from him but they're inconsistent

Somebody asked pronman about Norris in the comments and that's what he had to say about him.

inb4 "great, Norris has no hockey iq"

 

[The Nemesis]

Also of note, Pronman is releasing team-by-team prospect rankings, 2 a day. As of tonight, the Sharks have not been revealed and rankings are complete from 31 up to 24.

 

[Lebanezer]

Also of note, Pronman is releasing team-by-team prospect rankings, 2 a day. As of tonight, the Sharks have not been revealed and rankings are complete from 31 up to 24.

Not 23 or 22 either.

 

[wishman]

Not 23 or 22 either.

I've been checking every morning fully expecting our name coming up. Pleasantly surprised we are at worst 21.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Every day his articles come out and I’m wildly shocked the Sharks haven’t been revealed yet. In a good way, though. I’ve always liked Pronman.

 

[Lebanezer]

Every day his articles come out and I’m wildly shocked the Sharks haven’t been revealed yet. In a good way, though. I’ve always liked Pronman.

I want to see who he thinks are very good NHL prospects besides Merkley. He’s the only obvious one, but that also probably means he’s the only one.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I want to see who he thinks are very good NHL prospects besides Merkley. He’s the only obvious one, but that also probably means he’s the only one.

Maybe he is just looking at how many of our prospects have a real chance at making the NHL (aka safe prospects) as opposed to how many high end guys we have.

 

[hohosaregood]

I'm guessing Ch-twins are pushing us up a little higher than we expected. Ferraro also had a good season. And Norris is still pretty solid. Still, I'm curious to see why.

 

[The Nemesis]

I'm guessing Ch-twins are pushing us up a little higher than we expected. Ferraro also had a good season. And Norris is still pretty solid. Still, I'm curious to see why.

I feel like we have a number of second-tier "pretty good" type prospects. Pronman's grouping breakdown is as follows:

1) Special: elite-of-the-elite, very best at their position types. A little more generous than the so-called generational prospect

2) Elite: top 10% of the league at their position

3) High-end: top line/top pairing guy

4) Very Good: top 6/top 4/Starting G

5) Legit NHL Prospect: Middle 6/Middle Pairing types with fringey "Very Good" skills who could possibly be better than they're projected.

6) Have A Chance: Long-shot or unlikely impact guys who have the tools to rise up even if they most likely won't make it.

7) Depth: low-end roster filler, shuttle, or emergency call-up guys.

Spitballing without any real analysis or thought, I would say we could break down as:

1) None

2) None

3) Merkely

4) Balcers, Chmelevski, Ferraro

5) Norris, Chekhovich, Letunov, Simek, Praplan, Suomela, Gambrell, Bibeau

6) Blichfeld, Middleton, Leonard, Roy, Halbgewachs, Gregor, Karlsson, Kotkov, Korenar

7) True, Chartier, Wood

*please note that the above names were not ordered in any particular way within a given group. It was basically however I put them in after a couple of passes of the pool and re-ordered things.

Also consider that Pronman's pool rankings extends its age range all the way to 26 (being 27 is the cut-off)

The system's biggest weakness is that it lacks top shelf options besides Merkely. But its biggest strength is that we have a ton of prospects who only need a tiny bit of helium to go from being stuck in the morass of forgettable 2nd or 3rd tier prospects to actually being legit roster players. The #5 group above is 8 guys who could reasonably be reliable NHL roster players in a 3rd line/#4-5 capacity, but we might also get a couple of them who seize a slightly better job. The #6 grouping is a lot of guys who might just end up as AHL fodder, but a couple might also sneak up into a 2nd line or 3rd line role.

We lack elite quality, and we lack quantity on the higher end of things, but the system has a surprising amount of intriguing depth under the disappointingly barren surface.

 

[hohosaregood]

I feel like we have a number of second-tier "pretty good" type prospects. Pronman's grouping breakdown is as follows:

1) Special: elite-of-the-elite, very best at their position types. A little more generous than the so-called generational prospect

2) Elite: top 10% of the league at their position

3) High-end: top line/top pairing guy

4) Very Good: top 6/top 4/Starting G

5) Legit NHL Prospect: Middle 6/Middle Pairing types with fringey "Very Good" skills who could possibly be better than they're projected.

6) Have A Chance: Long-shot or unlikely impact guys who have the tools to rise up even if they most likely won't make it.

7) Depth: low-end roster filler, shuttle, or emergency call-up guys.

Spitballing without any real analysis or thought, I would say we could break down as:

1) None

2) None

3) Merkely

4) Balcers, Chmelevski, Ferraro

5) Norris, Chekhovich, Letunov, Simek, Praplan, Suomela, Gambrell, Bibeau

6) Blichfeld, Middleton, Leonard, Roy, Halbgewachs, Gregor, Karlsson, Kotkov, Korenar

7) True, Chartier, Wood

*please note that the above names were not ordered in any particular way within a given group. It was basically however I put them in after a couple of passes of the pool and re-ordered things.

Also consider that Pronman's pool rankings extends its age range all the way to 26 (being 27 is the cut-off)

The system's biggest weakness is that it lacks top shelf options besides Merkely. But its biggest strength is that we have a ton of prospects who only need a tiny bit of helium to go from being stuck in the morass of forgettable 2nd or 3rd tier prospects to actually being legit roster players. The #5 group above is 8 guys who could reasonably be reliable NHL roster players in a 3rd line/#4-5 capacity, but we might also get a couple of them who seize a slightly better job. The #6 grouping is a lot of guys who might just end up as AHL fodder, but a couple might also sneak up into a 2nd line or 3rd line role.

We lack elite quality, and we lack quantity on the higher end of things, but the system has a surprising amount of intriguing depth under the disappointingly barren surface.

I'd probably push Norris and Chekhovich up a tier since that's how I group them in my mind but I don't really disagree.

 

[The Nemesis]

I'd probably push Norris and Chekhovich up a tier since that's how I group them in my mind but I don't really disagree.

Norris I feel like lacks the higher ceiling to push into the next group up. I don't know if he becomes a full-on top 6 forward, but I also don't think he falls a lot farther than being a good two-way 3rd liner as long as he doesn't completely bust.

Chekhovich was mostly about separating him from Chmelevski, who I feel has been slightly more impressive doing what he's done in the OHL vs Chekhovich's slightly lesser performance in a slightly lesser league. I don't feel comfortable enough to put Chmelevski any higher than he is, so the price to be paid is putting Chekhovich a level below him

But like I also said, I did this mostly on gut reactions and the interest of not taking too much time to write the post. Had I sat down and really put some serious thought into things, who knows how different it might've turned out.

 

[Lebanezer]

I feel like we have a number of second-tier "pretty good" type prospects. Pronman's grouping breakdown is as follows:

1) Special: elite-of-the-elite, very best at their position types. A little more generous than the so-called generational prospect

2) Elite: top 10% of the league at their position

3) High-end: top line/top pairing guy

4) Very Good: top 6/top 4/Starting G

5) Legit NHL Prospect: Middle 6/Middle Pairing types with fringey "Very Good" skills who could possibly be better than they're projected.

6) Have A Chance: Long-shot or unlikely impact guys who have the tools to rise up even if they most likely won't make it.

7) Depth: low-end roster filler, shuttle, or emergency call-up guys.

Spitballing without any real analysis or thought, I would say we could break down as:

1) None

2) None

3) Merkely

4) Balcers, Chmelevski, Ferraro

5) Norris, Chekhovich, Letunov, Simek, Praplan, Suomela, Gambrell, Bibeau

6) Blichfeld, Middleton, Leonard, Roy, Halbgewachs, Gregor, Karlsson, Kotkov, Korenar

7) True, Chartier, Wood

*please note that the above names were not ordered in any particular way within a given group. It was basically however I put them in after a couple of passes of the pool and re-ordered things.

Also consider that Pronman's pool rankings extends its age range all the way to 26 (being 27 is the cut-off)

The system's biggest weakness is that it lacks top shelf options besides Merkely. But its biggest strength is that we have a ton of prospects who only need a tiny bit of helium to go from being stuck in the morass of forgettable 2nd or 3rd tier prospects to actually being legit roster players. The #5 group above is 8 guys who could reasonably be reliable NHL roster players in a 3rd line/#4-5 capacity, but we might also get a couple of them who seize a slightly better job. The #6 grouping is a lot of guys who might just end up as AHL fodder, but a couple might also sneak up into a 2nd line or 3rd line role.

We lack elite quality, and we lack quantity on the higher end of things, but the system has a surprising amount of intriguing depth under the disappointingly barren surface.

He thinks Merkley is an elite talent. I think that’s why we haven’t seen the Sharks yet.

 

[Juxtaposer]

@The Nemesis I think that’s a pretty good run-down. Like you, I think we have a ton of guys who could be middle-six forwards and bottom-4 D.

With the Chtwins, I think Chekhovich’s notaby better AHL production should count for something.

Also, FWIW on May 21st, Pronman had Merkley at 10th overall for the 2018 draft.

 

[The Nemesis]

@The Nemesis I think that’s a pretty good run-down. Like you, I think we have a ton of guys who could be middle-six forwards and bottom-4 D.

With the Chtwins, I think Chekhovich’s notaby better AHL production should count for something.

Also, FWIW on May 21st, Pronman had Merkley at 10th overall for the 2018 draft.

I disagree with the bolded. It's only 10 games (6 RS, 4 PO) for each of them. Even at 11 points for Chekhovich vs 6 for Chmelevski, I'm not really comfortable moving the needle for what amounts to basically 2.5 hot weeks of play for Chekhovich vs Chmelevski's stronger whole CHL season, even if the Chekhovich surge was in a more difficult pro league. It's kind of like scouts getting hung up on a player having a hot WJC or U18 (I see you there, Noah Rod)

Admittedly Chekhovich isn't that far from jumping up to the next tier. He just had enough nagging doubt because of his lack of scoring improvement to make me keep him down. A good, improved (read: >ppg) season in the Q or some strong qualitative scouting reports that he's fixing some of his issues for 2018-19 can easily be enough to shove him over the divide and into the group with his draft-brother.

 

[wishman]

I'm going to guess (strictly what I think Pronman will have them as - not what I believe).

1) None

2) None

3) Merkely

4) Chmelevski

5) Ferraro, Norris, Balcers,

Edmonton who was ranked #22 had

1), 2), and 3) - None

4) Two players

5) Three players

 

[The Nemesis]

I'm going to guess (strictly what I think Pronman will have them as - not what I believe).

1) None

2) None

3) Merkely

4) Chmelevski

5) Ferraro, Norris, Balcers,

Edmonton who was ranked #22 had

1), 2), and 3) - None

4) Two players

5) Three players

It depends on how far ahead the Sharks are. If they show up tomorrow I think it's more likely we're at least sitting with 2 or 3 #4s and at least 3 #5s. But if Pronman is as high on Merkely as he is (potentially slotting him in tier #2) and we then have no 3s and a few 4s and a bunch of 5s/6s, maybe the Sharks don't show up until the late teens and it affords the space/ranking to have more players at the lower levels of the tier lists.

 

[Maladroit]

I agree with Nemesis, Chmelevski is clearly a cut above Chekhovich. Six good AHL games don't make up for the fact that his production regressed this year in the highest-scoring CHL league. I doubt Chekhovich ever turns into something at the NHL level. Loved the pick at the time but it's probably not gonna pan out.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I disagree with the bolded. It's only 10 games (6 RS, 4 PO) for each of them. Even at 11 points for Chekhovich vs 6 for Chmelevski, I'm not really comfortable moving the needle for what amounts to basically 2.5 hot weeks of play for Chekhovich vs Chmelevski's stronger whole CHL season, even if the Chekhovich surge was in a more difficult pro league. It's kind of like scouts getting hung up on a player having a hot WJC or U18 (I see you there, Noah Rod)

Admittedly Chekhovich isn't that far from jumping up to the next tier. He just had enough nagging doubt because of his lack of scoring improvement to make me keep him down. A good, improved (read: >ppg) season in the Q or some strong qualitative scouting reports that he's fixing some of his issues for 2018-19 can easily be enough to shove him over the divide and into the group with his draft-brother.

I didn’t say it should push him above Chemlevski, just that it should count for something. I think AHL games count a lot more than CHL games. Whereas with Rod, U18 games are a step down from NLA games.

 

[The Nemesis]

I didn’t say it should push him above Chemlevski, just that it should count for something. I think AHL games count a lot more than CHL games. Whereas with Rod, U18 games are a step down from NLA games.

I never said it should push him above Chmelevski either. Just that I put Chekhovich slightly behind Chemelvski based on their larger body of work and that 10 AHL games isn't a significant enough sample to make any real appreciable difference in closing that (relatively narrow) gap. It has nothing to do with me making any real comparison between the value of AHL or CHL game performance and everything to do with a small sample size.

I also never made any value judgement with Rod and his int'l tournament games, just used that as an example of the problem of making assessments of any real impact from a short-run string of games (since I know that I've heard Rod's value inflated because of his play in tournaments.)

 

[Juxtaposer]

I never said it should push him above Chmelevski either. Just that I put Chekhovich slightly behind Chemelvski based on their larger body of work and that 10 AHL games isn't a significant enough sample to make any real appreciable difference in closing that (relatively narrow) gap. It has nothing to do with me making any real comparison between the value of AHL or CHL game performance and everything to do with a small sample size.

I also never made any value judgement with Rod and his int'l tournament games, just used that as an example of the problem of making assessments of any real impact from a short-run string of games (since I know that I've heard Rod's value inflated because of his play in tournaments.)

I definitely understand and appreciate what you’re saying. I just think that AHL games are seriously no joke.

 

[OrrNumber4]

For the first time in a long time, you can envision holes in the Sharks's future forward core. For the longest time, you knew that Marleau, Thornton, Pavelski, and Couture were in the long-term plans of the organization, and those are difficult players to unseat. Even if you can imagine a core built around Couture, Hertl, Kane, and Meier, those players seem eminently beatable.

I hope that that bodes well for players like Norris, Chmelevski, and Chekhovich. You do need opportunities to grow as a player, and the Sharks appear primed for that.

 

[Lebanezer]

Pronman released 20 and 21 today and still no Sharks.

 

[Juxtaposer]

The Sharks have miraculously made it into the teens at worst on Pronman’s rankings. I’m in awe.

 

[Sharksrule04]

I think Pronman is very high on Chmelevski and Merkley and fairly high on Norris/Ferraro. I could see that being the reason we will be in the top 20. Nice to see our prospect pool getting recognition from one of the most respected people for evaluating young talent.