Prospect Info: St. Louis Blues Top-20 Prospects: #3

[Stealth JD]

This idea that Perunovich is going to struggle in the NHL is just as unfounded as any optimism that he is going to be our Blue Line Savior, and frankly there is 10x more negativity around him than there is talk that could be considered pumping his tires.

Perunovich is listed at 5'9 and 172 pounds. Quinn Hughes is listed at 5' 10" and 170 pounds.

Perunovich had 105 points in 115 games (0.91 PPG) in his 3 years in college hockey at Minnesota-Duluth and won 2 national championships and the Hobey Baker. Hughes had 62 points in 69 games (0.90 PPG) at Michigan and won no championships and no Hobey Baker.

Their size and college performances were eerily similar, and if anything Perunovich had the edge. And yet no one was concerned about Quinn Hughes' game translating to the NHL, and I assure you that you would be hard pressed to find a Blues fan that wouldn't want him on this team. So whether you think he's the next Bobby Orr, bound to bust, or anything in between, can we please just watch Perunovich play at the NHL or even the AHL level for a little while before we reach a conclusion as to who and what he is as a player?

Quinn Hughes = do not want. His offensive gifts are offset by his defensive deficiencies.
I'd expect Perunovich to be very similar, and to ultimately get crucified like Shattenkirk was.

 

[Ranksu]

Jeesus. I just looked up Perunovich did had shoulder surgery last winter.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

This idea that Perunovich is going to struggle in the NHL is just as unfounded as any optimism that he is going to be our Blue Line Savior, and frankly there is 10x more negativity around him than there is talk that could be considered pumping his tires.

Perunovich is listed at 5'9 and 172 pounds. Quinn Hughes is listed at 5' 10" and 170 pounds.

Perunovich had 105 points in 115 games (0.91 PPG) in his 3 years in college hockey at Minnesota-Duluth and won 2 national championships and the Hobey Baker. Hughes had 62 points in 69 games (0.90 PPG) at Michigan and won no championships and no Hobey Baker.

Their size and college performances were eerily similar, and if anything Perunovich had the edge. And yet no one was concerned about Quinn Hughes' game translating to the NHL, and I assure you that you would be hard pressed to find a Blues fan that wouldn't want him on this team. So whether you think he's the next Bobby Orr, bound to bust, or anything in between, can we please just watch Perunovich play at the NHL or even the AHL level for a little while before we reach a conclusion as to who and what he is as a player?

His first draft year, he was listed at 5'7" and 159#s. I'm curious as to what he really is. Reports have him listed between 5'8" -5'10". After missing a year to shoulder surgery ala Tarasenko, yes I have huge questions to call him a Tier 1 prospect. To call him a Tier 1 and a player rated 15th prospect in the NHL draft a tier 2 is somewhat questionable.

 

[MissouriMook]

Quinn Hughes = do not want. His offensive gifts are offset by his defensive deficiencies.
I'd expect Perunovich to be very similar, and to ultimately get crucified like Shattenkirk was.

I feel pretty comfortable saying that you would be in the minority on that. Despite his defensive shortcomings, putting a guy like that on your top pairing with someone who is a great defender like Parayko can be a perfect fit. While it is less than ideal to have a smallish player who isn't particularly good at defending out in his own zone against the other teams top lines, what is absolutely essential for success in today's NHL is to make the other team's top lines spend the majority of their ice time in their own zone defending. Guys like Hughes (and hopefully Perunovich) are capable of taking over a game by doing exactly that.

 

[Robb_K]

I feel pretty comfortable saying that you would be in the minority on that. Despite his defensive shortcomings, putting a guy like that on your top pairing with someone who is a great defender like Parayko can be a perfect fit. While it is less than ideal to have a smallish player who isn't particularly good at defending out in his own zone against the other teams top lines, what is absolutely essential for success in today's NHL is to make the other team's top lines spend the majority of their ice time in their own zone defending. Guys like Hughes (and hopefully Perunovich) are capable of taking over a game by doing exactly that.

Assuming that Parayko, with his back problems will ever get back to his best defending self is a big assumption. I certainly hope he will. But that remains to be seen. Without him doing that, The Blues have no real defensive anchor with which to pair Perunovich or Krug.

 

[Brian39]

You are really setting yourself up for disappointment putting Perunovich in Tier 1. Let's see if he even holds up to the AHL. I compare Perunovich to when the Rams drafted the Heisman option quarterback. This is the pros. Bigger and much faster.... He is a Tier 2 guy without a doubt, especially if Kostin and Robertsson are Tier 2. They at least look the part. You realize that he wasn't THE guy on his college team when it came to shutting down the other team? He was a specialist most of his college career. It is a special gift on the powerplay, but he is going to have to be the second coming of Cliff Ronning to make it here.

Yeah, that wasn't remotely his job. Quinn Hughes also wasn't THE guy at Michigan when it came down to shutting down the other team. That role was played by his partner (Cessoni) and Luke Martin.

There is a massive difference between being your team's #1 shutdown guy and being a "specialist." Perunovich was neither. He played top 4 minutes for the blueline that was overwhelmingly considered the best in the NCAA and backed that up with back to back National Championships and a #5 ranking when COVID ended their potential 3 peat bid.

He absolutely wasn't a guy who was parked on the bench except for PPs and sheltered offensive use. He was +49 for his college career, so let's not act like he was some liability out there defensively. Does he need to improve his defensive game in order to be effective as an NHL-level caliber offensive D man? Absolutely. But there was nothing concerning about his usage or performance in the NCAA.

 

[Brian39]

Quinn Hughes = do not want. His offensive gifts are offset by his defensive deficiencies.
I'd expect Perunovich to be very similar, and to ultimately get crucified like Shattenkirk was.

Quinn Hughes being utilized the way Vancouver did last year is an organizational failure. He inexplicably played over a minute a night more than any other Canuck defenseman at even strength and got about 85% of those minutes with Travis Hamonic. Making that tandem your most-used even strength pairing is...something else. Put another way, those 2 got 13:42 a night together at 5 on 5, which was 3 minutes a night more than the next-most used pairing of Schmidt/Edler. The way Vancouver used Hughes might be the biggest misuse of a player in the NHL last year.

With that said, if your organization just doesn't want Quinn Hughes then that is as big of an organizational failure. He's a top 5-10 PP QB in the league and a top 40 offensive driver at even strength. That's enormously valuable and any GM who can't build a successful blueline around that shouldn't be in the league (I'm a firm believer that Jim Benning shouldn't be an NHL GM).

Not every defensive prospect needs to be a shut down D man or a Norris caliber 2 way guy to become highly valuable as a fully formed player. There is a very, very good chance that we don't have any prospects who will top out as greater than an elite PP QB who needs to be heavily sheltered at even strength in the bottom 4.

This revisionist history regarding the crucifixion of Kevin Shattenkirk is getting tiresome. Shattenkirk became expendable to this franchise only when a 23 year old Parayko actualized into a legit top 20 RHD and Petro had 4 more years left on his contract. He was a career +24 as a Blue averaging over 21 minutes a night in his career here. He posted insanely good possession stats over his career in St. Louis and was the 3rd most used D man during the playoffs during our run to the Conference Final. The Blues were 3rd in the NHL in goals against per game during Shatty's tenure as a Blue and Shatty played more even strength minutes in that stretch than any skater besides Petro. Clearly, you can build a successful blue line with a player like him logging significant time.

For Colorado, he was half of a trade that returned a 22 year old 1st overall pick, a bottom 6 center and upgraded their 2nd round pick to a 1st round pick. For the Blues, he returned a 1st round pick and a young middle 6 forward (Sanford) as a pure rental. We would have gotten another 2nd rounder if Washington had re-signed him or made the Conference Final. As a UFA, he reportedly took a pretty big discount to go to the Rangers and "only" got $6.65M a year for 4 years. That worked terribly, he got bought out and then the Lightning brought him in as their #5 D man. He had 34 points through 70 games playing 19 minutes a night, then had 13 points in 25 playoff games playing 19:30 a night in the playoffs. They won the Cup with him as their 6th leading scorer in the playoffs. His +8 was 6th on the team. Terrible-player-Shattenkirk still had such an atrocious reputation and value league-wide that he could only find a job paying him $3.9M a year for 3 years in his 30s. He also represented the USA at the 2014 Olympics.

Some people feel that Shatty is a useless, terrible D man. The league as a whole completely disagrees and Tampa had him play a pretty sizeable role in Stanley Cup victory. I will not be at all surprised if none of our prospects are ever as good as Shattenkirk. He is not the example of a poor D man that you think he is. Those types of D men are often paid too much and it is difficult to build the proper group around them if you pay them like legit top pair D men. But that doesn't mean that we should write off prospects as red flags because they might be good enough that they command an overpayment 5 years down the line. That means you use them as cheap sheltered scoring talent through their ELC, bridge them to a cheap/reasonable 2nd contract to keep playing that role and then flip them for assets instead of giving them the UFA overpayment.

 

[Stealth JD]

Quinn Hughes being utilized the way Vancouver did last year is an organizational failure. He inexplicably played over a minute a night more than any other Canuck defenseman at even strength and got about 85% of those minutes with Travis Hamonic. Making that tandem your most-used even strength pairing is...something else. Put another way, those 2 got 13:42 a night together at 5 on 5, which was 3 minutes a night more than the next-most used pairing of Schmidt/Edler. The way Vancouver used Hughes might be the biggest misuse of a player in the NHL last year.

With that said, if your organization just doesn't want Quinn Hughes then that is as big of an organizational failure. He's a top 5-10 PP QB in the league and a top 40 offensive driver at even strength. That's enormously valuable and any GM who can't build a successful blueline around that shouldn't be in the league (I'm a firm believer that Jim Benning shouldn't be an NHL GM).

Not every defensive prospect needs to be a shut down D man or a Norris caliber 2 way guy to become highly valuable as a fully formed player. There is a very, very good chance that we don't have any prospects who will top out as greater than an elite PP QB who needs to be heavily sheltered at even strength in the bottom 4.

This revisionist history regarding the crucifixion of Kevin Shattenkirk is getting tiresome. Shattenkirk became expendable to this franchise only when a 23 year old Parayko actualized into a legit top 20 RHD and Petro had 4 more years left on his contract. He was a career +24 as a Blue averaging over 21 minutes a night in his career here. He posted insanely good possession stats over his career in St. Louis and was the 3rd most used D man during the playoffs during our run to the Conference Final. The Blues were 3rd in the NHL in goals against per game during Shatty's tenure as a Blue and Shatty played more even strength minutes in that stretch than any skater besides Petro. Clearly, you can build a successful blue line with a player like him logging significant time.

For Colorado, he was half of a trade that returned a 22 year old 1st overall pick, a bottom 6 center and upgraded their 2nd round pick to a 1st round pick. For the Blues, he returned a 1st round pick and a young middle 6 forward (Sanford) as a pure rental. We would have gotten another 2nd rounder if Washington had re-signed him or made the Conference Final. As a UFA, he reportedly took a pretty big discount to go to the Rangers and "only" got $6.65M a year for 4 years. That worked terribly, he got bought out and then the Lightning brought him in as their #5 D man. He had 34 points through 70 games playing 19 minutes a night, then had 13 points in 25 playoff games playing 19:30 a night in the playoffs. They won the Cup with him as their 6th leading scorer in the playoffs. His +8 was 6th on the team. Terrible-player-Shattenkirk still had such an atrocious reputation and value league-wide that he could only find a job paying him $3.9M a year for 3 years in his 30s. He also represented the USA at the 2014 Olympics.

Some people feel that Shatty is a useless, terrible D man. The league as a whole completely disagrees and Tampa had him play a pretty sizeable role in Stanley Cup victory. I will not be at all surprised if none of our prospects are ever as good as Shattenkirk. He is not the example of a poor D man that you think he is. Those types of D men are often paid too much and it is difficult to build the proper group around them if you pay them like legit top pair D men. But that doesn't mean that we should write off prospects as red flags because they might be good enough that they command an overpayment 5 years down the line. That means you use them as cheap sheltered scoring talent through their ELC, bridge them to a cheap/reasonable 2nd contract to keep playing that role and then flip them for assets instead of giving them the UFA overpayment.

I don't want my #1D man to need to be sheltered. Personal preference. For what that kid is going to earn on his next deal, I'd want no part of it. I want my $8M/yr+ defender to actually be able to defend.

Shattenkirk had a lot of detractors well before Parayko made him expendable. Perunovich may put up a lot of points, but if he gets exposed in the playoffs like Shatty routinely did in STL (or like Girard did in Colorado), he'll become another whipping boy in the long list of whipping-boys.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

I don't want my #1D man to need to be sheltered. Personal preference. For what that kid is going to earn on his next deal, I'd want no part of it. I want my $8M/yr+ defender to actually be able to defend.

Shattenkirk had a lot of detractors well before Parayko made him expendable. Perunovich may put up a lot of points, but if he gets exposed in the playoffs like Shatty routinely did in STL (or like Girard did in Colorado), he'll become another whipping boy in the long list of whipping-boys.

No matter what player it is. Every player on this team is going to be a whipping boy in the long list of whipping boys.

 

[Celtic Note]

Quinn Hughes being utilized the way Vancouver did last year is an organizational failure. He inexplicably played over a minute a night more than any other Canuck defenseman at even strength and got about 85% of those minutes with Travis Hamonic. Making that tandem your most-used even strength pairing is...something else. Put another way, those 2 got 13:42 a night together at 5 on 5, which was 3 minutes a night more than the next-most used pairing of Schmidt/Edler. The way Vancouver used Hughes might be the biggest misuse of a player in the NHL last year.

With that said, if your organization just doesn't want Quinn Hughes then that is as big of an organizational failure. He's a top 5-10 PP QB in the league and a top 40 offensive driver at even strength. That's enormously valuable and any GM who can't build a successful blueline around that shouldn't be in the league (I'm a firm believer that Jim Benning shouldn't be an NHL GM).

Not every defensive prospect needs to be a shut down D man or a Norris caliber 2 way guy to become highly valuable as a fully formed player. There is a very, very good chance that we don't have any prospects who will top out as greater than an elite PP QB who needs to be heavily sheltered at even strength in the bottom 4.

This revisionist history regarding the crucifixion of Kevin Shattenkirk is getting tiresome. Shattenkirk became expendable to this franchise only when a 23 year old Parayko actualized into a legit top 20 RHD and Petro had 4 more years left on his contract. He was a career +24 as a Blue averaging over 21 minutes a night in his career here. He posted insanely good possession stats over his career in St. Louis and was the 3rd most used D man during the playoffs during our run to the Conference Final. The Blues were 3rd in the NHL in goals against per game during Shatty's tenure as a Blue and Shatty played more even strength minutes in that stretch than any skater besides Petro. Clearly, you can build a successful blue line with a player like him logging significant time.

For Colorado, he was half of a trade that returned a 22 year old 1st overall pick, a bottom 6 center and upgraded their 2nd round pick to a 1st round pick. For the Blues, he returned a 1st round pick and a young middle 6 forward (Sanford) as a pure rental. We would have gotten another 2nd rounder if Washington had re-signed him or made the Conference Final. As a UFA, he reportedly took a pretty big discount to go to the Rangers and "only" got $6.65M a year for 4 years. That worked terribly, he got bought out and then the Lightning brought him in as their #5 D man. He had 34 points through 70 games playing 19 minutes a night, then had 13 points in 25 playoff games playing 19:30 a night in the playoffs. They won the Cup with him as their 6th leading scorer in the playoffs. His +8 was 6th on the team. Terrible-player-Shattenkirk still had such an atrocious reputation and value league-wide that he could only find a job paying him $3.9M a year for 3 years in his 30s. He also represented the USA at the 2014 Olympics.

Some people feel that Shatty is a useless, terrible D man. The league as a whole completely disagrees and Tampa had him play a pretty sizeable role in Stanley Cup victory. I will not be at all surprised if none of our prospects are ever as good as Shattenkirk. He is not the example of a poor D man that you think he is. Those types of D men are often paid too much and it is difficult to build the proper group around them if you pay them like legit top pair D men. But that doesn't mean that we should write off prospects as red flags because they might be good enough that they command an overpayment 5 years down the line. That means you use them as cheap sheltered scoring talent through their ELC, bridge them to a cheap/reasonable 2nd contract to keep playing that role and then flip them for assets instead of giving them the UFA overpayment.

I feel like Dunn falls into this same boat for many.

I get the sense that a lot of defensemen evaluations are tied to breakout passes.

I feel like the following is the thought process:
Player X made a bad pass because they were trying to do too much = bad defender. Conversely, good defensive defenseman rings puck along boards, resulting in a turnover = a play that just happens.

Defensive defenseman can shutdown good forward = that’s a defenseman’s job. Starting a breakout by moving your feet or accomplishing a hard to make pass = a nice to have feature, but not critical (even though having puck possession is a more important defense than defending the opposition with the puck on their stick).

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Yeah, that wasn't remotely his job. Quinn Hughes also wasn't THE guy at Michigan when it came down to shutting down the other team. That role was played by his partner (Cessoni) and Luke Martin.

There is a massive difference between being your team's #1 shutdown guy and being a "specialist." Perunovich was neither. He played top 4 minutes for the blueline that was overwhelmingly considered the best in the NCAA and backed that up with back to back National Championships and a #5 ranking when COVID ended their potential 3 peat bid.

He absolutely wasn't a guy who was parked on the bench except for PPs and sheltered offensive use. He was +49 for his college career, so let's not act like he was some liability out there defensively. Does he need to improve his defensive game in order to be effective as an NHL-level caliber offensive D man? Absolutely. But there was nothing concerning about his usage or performance in the NCAA.

Brian,
The year Perunovich was drafted he was a Sophmore. He did not play when the game mattered his first two years. Go watch the games. I follow college hockey. That's a fact. We could've drafted him in the 6th round. I do hope he pans out, but as much as folks complain about Krug....you will be disappointed. Fortunately, his college team was stacked with solid defenders. The only way he plays here is if Krug is gone. Then we may be able to shelter him.

 

[Brian39]

I don't want my #1D man to need to be sheltered. Personal preference. For what that kid is going to earn on his next deal, I'd want no part of it. I want my $8M/yr+ defender to actually be able to defend.

Shattenkirk had a lot of detractors well before Parayko made him expendable. Perunovich may put up a lot of points, but if he gets exposed in the playoffs like Shatty routinely did in STL (or like Girard did in Colorado), he'll become another whipping boy in the long list of whipping-boys.

So again, don't pay them like a #1 D man. Use them on their ELC, use your overwhelming team leverage to get them on a cheap/reasonable bridge deal and then flip them for a bunch of assets before paying them like a #1D. Quinn Hughes has zero leverage if the team doesn't have long term plans for him. Just like Vince Dunn didn't. You don't have to overpay a guy or misuse them as a #1D. Hold firm on your RFAs without arbitration rights, squeeze 3-5 years of good play out of them in a support role and then move them for way more than what you paid for them.

Vancouver is almost certainly going overpay Hughes and try to build around him as their #1 D man. I think that will be a huge mistake, but that doesn't mean that I don't want any part of the player or don't want my prospects to have similar skill sets. I would just handle them differently than the way Vancouver is/will handle Hughes.

 

[Brian39]

Brian,
The year Perunovich was drafted he was a Sophmore. He did not play when the game mattered his first two years. Go watch the games. I follow college hockey. That's a fact. We could've drafted him in the 6th round. I do hope he pans out, but as much as folks complain about Krug....you will be disappointed. Fortunately, his college team was stacked with solid defenders. The only way he plays here is if Krug is gone. Then we may be able to shelter him.

He was drafted after his Freshman season. No one drafted him prior to him playing college because he had a miserable season in the USHL.

I don't know whether I watched him his freshman year other than the Frozen Four games. My NCAA focus is usually with an eye towards prospects (except for DU and CC because they were the teams that I could easily watch on TV). But after we drafted him I started seeking out UMD games for his sophomore and junior seasons. In each of the games I watched (including multiple elimination games) he was playing a regular shift in all situations and wasn't stapled to the bench when the game mattered. Unless your definition of "out there when the game matters" is only limited to being out there when the other team has the goalie pulled, then your description doesn't match any of the games I watched.

I agree that Krug has made him expendable, but that is a very, very different conversation than whether he can defend adequately enough at the NHL level to be worth sheltering in the bottom 4 in exchange for his offensive contributions.

 

[Brian39]

His first draft year, he was listed at 5'7" and 159#s. I'm curious as to what he really is. Reports have him listed between 5'8" -5'10". After missing a year to shoulder surgery ala Tarasenko, yes I have huge questions to call him a Tier 1 prospect. To call him a Tier 1 and a player rated 15th prospect in the NHL draft a tier 2 is somewhat questionable.

He definitely grew after his draft year. He looked small as a college player, but not 5'7" small. I'd guess 5'9" but wouldn't be surprised if you have to round up to get there. I'm more concerned with the weight on his frame than I am the height. Especially after a shoulder injury. Hard to do the required bulking up in the gym while recovering from a shoulder injury.

 

[Brian39]

Hofer for me here. I think he has the potential to be the biggest contributor of this prospect pool.

With Husso struggling, I don’t think it’s long before he gets a shot at the backup role.

Binnington also needs to show more as a starter if he is going to hold down that spot long-term (yes I know his contract suggests it’s his to lose). The last two years for him don’t look as great as his Cup winning year which is understandable given how unsustainable it was for most goalies. But, he hasn’t been good enough since to suggest he cannot be unseated.

The rest of the guys have big question marks and ones that are just as big as Hofer’s or bigger IMO.

Can Bolduc utilize his teammates more or will he continue to be a bit of a one man show?

Can Robertsson get his release to be quicker or will he struggle to get it off at the NHL level?

Will Neighbours be able to think the game fast enough and build up his skill level to be a productive middle 6 player or will those hamper his ability?

Has Ellis shown enough to tell us he will be better than Hofer?

I'm also voting for Hofer (just like last poll), but Husso struggling absolutely shouldn't impact Hofer's path to the NHL. Hofer just turned 21 and COVID demolished his first pro season. He only played 10 games last year and he needs AHL starts for the next couple seasons. If Husso struggles and needs to be replaced mid-season, then the answer needs to come from outside the organization. For a minor injury, the stop-gap call up should be Lindgren. If Husso is getting replaced next summer, we should at least be bringing in a veteran journeyman to plug the backup job unless Hofer is the AHL's best goalie this season. Even then, I'd bring a cheap vet in and force Hofer to steal the job.

Goalies really shouldn't be promoted to the NHL before 23 unless they have clearly outplayed whatever pro league they are in.

Hellebuyck was promoted to the NHL a few months before turning 23. He had 88 AHL games under his belt and had posted a career .921 in that league. He was also the best goalie in the NCAA at 19 and 20.

Vasilevskiy got some NHL starts as a 20 year old, but only as a injury call up. He also had 2 seasons in the KHL before that and was one of that league's top goalies as a 19 year old. They started him in the AHL as a 21 year old and he posted a .935 before he truly earned the backup job as a 21 year old.

Carter Hart is the most recent super young guy to get an NHL shot. He got the call up as a 20 year old and the first 70 games of his career looked great. He absolutely imploded as a 22 year old and was arguably the league's worst goalie last year. There is not doubt that he was the worst starter/tandem guy in the league and he was dramatically outplayed by his backup, a 35 year old Brian Elliott. He is no longer waivers-exempt, so he is going to have to figure his game out at the NHL level after facing the first adversity of his career. I like Hart a lot and think he will be fine, but if you forgo the AHL experience then you are gambling on your NHL team having a year like the Flyers had last season.

My outlook on Hofer is that he has the potential to be a good NHL starter. His development should be handled with a total focus on reaching that goal in 3-4 years. Let him rack up 100 starts in the AHL over the next couple years and then be the backup in 2023/24 (year #3 of Binner's 6 year deal). Hofer will just have turned 23 before that season. He'll have 4 more seasons before hitting UFA and that will give us plenty of time to let the 2 of them battle for the NHL net before being financially pushed into a real decision.

 

[Celtic Note]

I'm also voting for Hofer (just like last poll), but Husso struggling absolutely shouldn't impact Hofer's path to the NHL. Hofer just turned 21 and COVID demolished his first pro season. He only played 10 games last year and he needs AHL starts for the next couple seasons. If Husso struggles and needs to be replaced mid-season, then the answer needs to come from outside the organization. For a minor injury, the stop-gap call up should be Lindgren. If Husso is getting replaced next summer, we should at least be bringing in a veteran journeyman to plug the backup job unless Hofer is the AHL's best goalie this season. Even then, I'd bring a cheap vet in and force Hofer to steal the job.

Goalies really shouldn't be promoted to the NHL before 23 unless they have clearly outplayed whatever pro league they are in.

Hellebuyck was promoted to the NHL a few months before turning 23. He had 88 AHL games under his belt and had posted a career .921 in that league. He was also the best goalie in the NCAA at 19 and 20.

Vasilevskiy got some NHL starts as a 20 year old, but only as a injury call up. He also had 2 seasons in the KHL before that and was one of that league's top goalies as a 19 year old. They started him in the AHL as a 21 year old and he posted a .935 before he truly earned the backup job as a 21 year old.

Carter Hart is the most recent super young guy to get an NHL shot. He got the call up as a 20 year old and the first 70 games of his career looked great. He absolutely imploded as a 22 year old and was arguably the league's worst goalie last year. There is not doubt that he was the worst starter/tandem guy in the league and he was dramatically outplayed by his backup, a 35 year old Brian Elliott. He is no longer waivers-exempt, so he is going to have to figure his game out at the NHL level after facing the first adversity of his career. I like Hart a lot and think he will be fine, but if you forgo the AHL experience then you are gambling on your NHL team having a year like the Flyers had last season.

My outlook on Hofer is that he has the potential to be a good NHL starter. His development should be handled with a total focus on reaching that goal in 3-4 years. Let him rack up 100 starts in the AHL over the next couple years and then be the backup in 2023/24 (year #3 of Binner's 6 year deal). Hofer will just have turned 23 before that season. He'll have 4 more seasons before hitting UFA and that will give us plenty of time to let the 2 of them battle for the NHL net before being financially pushed into a real decision.

I don’t disagree. To clarify, I was merely saying that Husso wasn’t looking like the guy and his play doesn’t seem like it would have any bearing in Hofer. Husso won’t be a road block.

I also was not advocating that Hofer be the backup this year. Rather, he has a clear path to the throne down the road.

EDIT: I am less tied to the age of the goalie but find 2ish years in the AHL is generally what is needed if you are a guy with the talent to have a shot at being a starter and not be rushed. I am guessing that age 23 is around when that happens based on your research.

 

[MissouriMook]

One of the wildcards in the Hofer debate is that we can't forget that we will also have Ellis ready for the AHL this season. It will be interesting to see how the assignments shake out. We are likely to have 3 goalies ready for the AHL (including Lindgren) and someone will likely either have to be sitting in the press box or in the ECHL to get everyone the starts they need to stay sharp and define their roles.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

He definitely grew after his draft year. He looked small as a college player, but not 5'7" small. I'd guess 5'9" but wouldn't be surprised if you have to round up to get there. I'm more concerned with the weight on his frame than I am the height. Especially after a shoulder injury. Hard to do the required bulking up in the gym while recovering from a shoulder injury.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm rooting for the kid, but his ceiling truly is a 6th defenseman (playing with a 1 or 2 shutdown guy) and specialist. I would hope that doesn't fit your top 10 as a prospect. He won't hit the ice when your ahead by 1 or 2 goals at the end of the game much like his college days. His specialty is offense and he is very good at it. Much like Hoffman and a one-timer. I hope it translates to the next level, and I hope we have the players around him to shield him utilizing his talents. I think he may be better suited for playing on the wing. I can see him being in our top 5 definitely with a move up front.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Don't misunderstand me. I'm rooting for the kid, but his ceiling truly is a 6th defenseman (playing with a 1 or 2 shutdown guy) and specialist. I would hope that doesn't fit your top 10 as a prospect. He won't hit the ice when your ahead by 1 or 2 goals at the end of the game much like his college days. His specialty is offense and he is very good at it. Much like Hoffman and a one-timer. I hope it translates to the next level, and I hope we have the players around him to shield him utilizing his talents. I think he may be better suited for playing on the wing. I can see him being in our top 5 definitely with a move up front.

Your assessment is at odds with the Blues’ organizational projections for Perunovich. His lost season last year blurs everything, but your take is not the company line.

 

[MissouriMook]

Your assessment is at odds with the Blues’ organizational projections for Perunovich. His lost season last year blurs everything, but your take is not the company line.

Yeah, but are you going to believe an amateur or professional scouting department for an NHL team over an internet rando? Come on. It's 2021 for crying out loud.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Your assessment is at odds with the Blues’ organizational projections for Perunovich. His lost season last year blurs everything, but your take is not the company line.

Let’s see where were at in four years.