Prospect Info: St. Louis Blues Prospect Ranking #6

[EastonBlues22]

1) Vince Dunn (Tie 32.88% - Head-to-head tiebreaker 58%)
2) Ville Husso (Tie 32.88% - Head-to-head tiebreaker 42%)
3) Jake Walman (40.68%)
4) Jordan Schmaltz (56.92%)
5) Ivan Barbashev (55.36%)

Post any names you would like to see added to future polls.

Click to read more...

 

[STL fan in MN]

It's time for Thompson and Kyrou IMO.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I'm going with Rattie mostly because of where he is in his development.

 

[542365]

I went with Thompson. Only other guy I considered was Kyrou. Blues were higher on Thompson than Kyrou, so I'll trust their judgement. If I based it solely on the prospect camp though(the only time I've seen either guy play), I would have Kyrou ahead of Thompson. Thompson wasn't bad at the development camp, in fact he was very good, but Kyrou really carried the play and was exceptional for most of the camp.

 

[EastonBlues22]

It's time for Thompson and Kyrou IMO.

I think an argument can be made for either over Barbashev.

Our forward prospect pool is rather underwhelming relative to most other organizations.

 

[Majorityof1]

I'm going with Rattie mostly because of where he is in his development.

Same. He is the next man up. He could stick and be an NHLer if we had a 3rd line spot to give him and some time to see him adjust to the NHL.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Same. He is the next man up. He could stick and be an NHLer if we had a 3rd line spot to give him and some time to see him adjust to the NHL.

One of the things I like about this series is that it gives everyone a chance to weigh in on how they value prospects. There's no right answer. It's a fun thing to talk about during the offseason, and it gives us a chance to see where we stand and how our collective opinions interpret the Blues prospects.

Personally, I value upside more than proximity. A cheap third liner has some organizational value, but not *that* much. Competent third liners are always available, so it really just saves the organization a bit of money that they can put to use elsewhere.

A cheap top 6/top 4 player has much more organizational value...higher cost savings, and it's rather difficult to lay your hands on a top 6/top 4 guy if you need one since the supply is lower and demand is so much higher.

With that in mind, I'll almost always favor the riskier prospect with the higher ceiling over the lower ceiling guy that's closer/safer.

 

[KirkOut]

We've reached the point where the guys who I think probably deserve to be voted in this area I have never seen play a single time. So I will blindly vote for Thompson

 

[Frenzy31]

I had TT at 4 due to upside. An argument can also be made for Rattie due to development - but that could be said of really anyone in the top 5.

I like what I have seen of TT - could of games against Hockey East. I think, outside of Dunn/Walman that he has the most upside. Like all players drafted with little development time, I think there is risk, but less then many other players listed ahead of him.

Not many kids play in against Hockey East competition prior to being drafted, unless you have been passed over. He held his own against one of the top conferences in the NCAA. That is pretty impressive.

And as I said in another thread, he is a whole different level from MacEachern. Outside of position, he is a full step up in development at his age and accomplishment.

 

[Majorityof1]

One of the things I like about this series is that it gives everyone a chance to weigh in on how they value prospects. There's no right answer. It's a fun thing to talk about during the offseason, and it gives us a chance to see where we stand and how our collective opinions interpret the Blues prospects.

Personally, I value upside more than proximity. A cheap third liner has some organizational value, but not *that* much. Competent third liners are always available, so it really just saves the organization a bit of money that they can put to use elsewhere.

A cheap top 6/top 4 player has much more organizational value...higher cost savings, and it's rather difficult to lay your hands on a top 6/top 4 guy if you need one since the supply is lower and demand is so much higher.

With that in mind, I'll almost always favor the riskier prospect with the higher ceiling over the lower ceiling guy that's closer/safer.

I agree, although I may balance risk a little more than you. I still value potential heavily. I think Rattie still has top 6 upside. He has not gotten the chance to play at all, and needs at least a 3rd line role to get adjusted. But he could end up a decent second line winger. If we had another prospect with higher than 2nd line upside, that wasn't a complete stretch, I'd go for him. I don't think we do. As was shown last poll, I am not a fan of Thompson at all.

Kyrou is the only guy I see with even a 1% chance at first line upside. And its not much more than 1%. He has very little strength to win board battles, even against guys his age. That will only worsen as the levels increase, so he really has to get a lot stronger. And his shot is terrible. Its slow to release and has no zip. You can't get by with 0 shot. You have to be a threat to score somewhat. His speed and vision make him an attractive option though. He could be a really fast Lehtera if he can improve his strength a lot and his shot some.

So Rattie's 2nd line upside, combined with being NHL ready puts him above our rather crappy remaining pool imo.

 

[STL fan in MN]

I think an argument can be made for either over Barbashev.

Our forward prospect pool is rather underwhelming relative to most other organizations.

Yeah, that would be a fair argument. I have them all in the same tier.

I really like Kyrou. Very fast, shifty and plays with confidence. I think he'll explode in points this season with a bigger role in Sarnia. He's more of a guy with 2nd line/secondary scoring potential but I like his game.

 

[Robb_K]

I went with Thompson. Only other guy I considered was Kyrou. Blues were higher on Thompson than Kyrou, so I'll trust their judgement. If I based it solely on the prospect camp though(the only time I've seen either guy play), I would have Kyrou ahead of Thompson. Thompson wasn't bad at the development camp, in fact he was very good, but Kyrou really carried the play and was exceptional for most of the camp.

Based on current skill and offensive sense, Kyrou would be ahead. But, you can't teach size. After Thompson fills out and bulks up, and develops his offensive skills more, develops his already good shot even more, and learns to play a more physical game, and learns to play defence, he should be a monster power forward. At centre, he should be (or could be) a VERY valuable player, and a difference-maker. The only question is how far along his upside potential development track he will end.

In terms of upside potential, he's GOT to get the nod over Kyrou and Rattie (limited ceiling, but more ready now). Vanelli is too far away, at this point, but COULD possibly end up as a more accomplished NHLer, IF Thompson doesn't do the work to make himself a better player (e.g. busts), and the same could be said for Fitzpatrick, who COULD potentially be a Top 10-15 NHL starting goalie, but could also, easily be a bust.

At this point, I'd pick Thompson 1st, Kyrou 2nd, Rattie 3rd, then, it's up for grabs for a whole bunch of prospect, with the whole gamut of possibilities from complete NHL bust, to solid NHL regular.

 

[Celtic Note]

I think an argument can be made for either over Barbashev.

Our forward prospect pool is rather underwhelming relative to most other organizations.

I 100% agree.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I 100% agree.

Yup.

 

[Evocable Manager]

I'm not a huge fan of Tage Thompson. I see some potential and more enlightened after what I saw in the rookie camp, but I've always viewed Kyrou as the more talented, faster and in my opinion better player. I think both have 2nd line potential. They're close but I'm giving the edge to Kyrou.