The Hockey News "Future Watch" 2011

Habsfan18

The Hockey Library
May 13, 2003
30,614
8,625
Ontario
Got a little sneak peak at FW 2011 in the latest issue of THN. We got lists for 3 Canadian teams.

Ottawa:

1. David Rundblad (22)
2. Jared Cowen (40)
3. Robin Lehner (44)
4. Jakob Silfverberg
5. Bobby Butler
6. Patrick Wiercioch
7. Colin Greening
8. Jim O'Brien
9. Erik Condra
10. Eric Gryba

Calgary:

1. Tim Erixon (15)
2. T.J. Brodie (69)
3. Greg Nemisz
4. Ryan Howse
5. Leland Irving
6. Lance Bouma
7. John Ramage
8. Mitch Wahl
9. Joni Ortio
10. Matt Pelech

Toronto:

1. Nazem Kadri (13)
2. James Reimer
3. Brad Ross
4. Keith Aulie
5. Luca Caputi
6. Greg McKegg
7. Jerry D'Amigo
8. Marcel Mueller
9. Jurai Mikus
10. Jesse Blacker
 

Habsfan18

The Hockey Library
May 13, 2003
30,614
8,625
Ontario
Thanks for the updates as always. Is the release date still early March?

No problem. Yes, the release date is still listed as March 14th for this year's version. However, subscribers in Canada should start receiving their copies in late February or within the first few days of March.

I believe I received mine around the 25th of February last year.
 

Granlund2Pulkkinen*

Guest
Rundblad is waaaaaaaay to low (high)... I would expect him to be top 15 at LEAST.
 

Qvist

Registered User
Apr 14, 2009
2,357
0
I find it interesting that Lehner at #44 isn't in the top 10 goalie prospects, so at least 11 goalies in the top 50? Hmmm, can't wait to see the list...

I noticed that too. You'd have to think that the previous goalie list isn't actually going to be the final one in the FW issue. If not, it'd be sensational.
 

Qvist

Registered User
Apr 14, 2009
2,357
0
Rundblad is waaaaaaaay to low (high)... I would expect him to be top 15 at LEAST.

I wonder if that reflects that opinion is a bit divided on him in the format used to produce the FW, ie, that there are a few scouts among those polled who aren't really sold on him at all. Last year he also fared notably badly, he didn't even make the top 75 (yes, I know he's had a breakout year only this year, but that is still a surprisingly weak result for someone drafted that high who hadn't had any particularly dramatic problems). It has to reflect something, it'd be interesting to know what....

Bit surprised to see Cowen at 40, I'd have thought he'd climbed a bit with the decent offensive development he seems to have shown this year? But I really only have his stats to go on. Anyone with experience of watching him play have anything to say about that?

Wiercioch and Nemisz fall out of the top 75. Just a temporary stall in the process, or a genuine sign of worry?
 

Minister of Offence

Registered User
Oct 2, 2009
24,407
0
www.chadhargrove.com
Wiercioch and Nemisz fall out of the top 75. Just a temporary stall in the process, or a genuine sign of worry?

Well don't ask THN because they haven't actually watched these guys play in the AHL, in the case of Weircioch they have no doubt just looked at stat lines. I think PW may have been a little overrated after that PPG season in the WCHA at 18.

He's lanky at 6'4 and needs a couple years to fill out if he is to have any chance at the NHL. But if he fills out nice, he could be a 3 or 4 sometime down the road. His point totals in Bingo are bad because they aren't giving him PP time while they are forcing him to learn how to play defense physically in that lanky body. We saw him in pre-season playing powerplay....we know he could be putting up points on an AHL PP.

Erixon and Kadri a combined 16 spots ahead of Rundblad is funny...These guys don't get to see these guys play enough to start objectively stating red flags, and Rundblad is carving the SEL playing 25-30 minutes every game for one of the top 2 teams in the league, while putting up rare offensive numbers for a young Dman.
 

Alfieghetti

inflamed
Jul 29, 2009
842
0
You people don't actually take THN seriously, do you? Relax about correcting rankings, these clowns are the high school paper of prospect coverage.
 

Habsfan18

The Hockey Library
May 13, 2003
30,614
8,625
Ontario
You people don't actually take THN seriously, do you? Relax about correcting rankings, these clowns are the high school paper of prospect coverage.

You do realize that the ratings and rankings of the prospects in Future Watch don't actually come from the staff at THN...don't you?

Every year, these rankings are the work of a panel of NHL scouts. This year, it was the work of 18 scouts.
 

The Fuhr*

Guest
You do realize that the ratings and rankings of the prospects in Future Watch don't actually come from the staff at THN...don't you?

Every year, these rankings are the work of a panel of NHL scouts. This year, it was the work of 18 scouts.

Also the good writers get the info directly from the team... I know for example the Yotes, Hawks and Habs lists come from the top of the organization.
 

MCI Center

Registered User
Jul 28, 2009
414
2
I knew this thread had to be coming. The Caps are going to have almost a complete overhaul atop their prospect rankings, with each of the Capitals' top 5 prospects from last year's edition (Carlson, Alzner, Neuvirth, Johansson, and Perreault) currently in the everyday line-up.

An attempt at 2011, counting Carlson, Alzner, Varlamov, Neuvirth, and Johansson as graduates:

1. Evgeny Kuznetsov, F (1st/2010)
2. Braden Holtby, G (3rd/2008)
3. Cody Eakin, F (3rd/2009)
4. Dmitri Orlov, D (2nd/2009)
5. Mathieu Perreault, F (6th/2006)

HM: Stanislav Galiev, F (3rd/2010), Andrew Gordon, F (7th/2004), and Patrick Wey, D (4th/2009)

It's looking like Washington's going to go from having ridiculous prospect depth by HF standards to just about average in one year. Looking at the Caps' top-20 according to HF, there's a good chance that only 8 (Kuznetsov, Holtby, Eakin, Orlov, Wey, Galiev, Grubauer, and Kugryshev) will maintain their "prospect" status by the beginning of next season.

The WJC, in pretty late retrospect, along with Perreault's status with the Caps has changed my prediction:

1. Evgeny Kuznetsov, F (1st/2010)
2. Dmitri Orlov, D (2nd/2009)
3. Braden Holtby, G (4th/2008)
4. Cody Eakin, F (3rd/2009)
5. Stanislav Galiev, F (3rd/2010)
6. Patrick Wey, D (4th/2009)
7. Dmitry Kugryshev, F (2nd/2008)
8. Brett Flemming, D (5th/2009)
9. Andrew Gordon, F (7th/2004)
10. Philipp Grubauer, G (4th/2010)

Wouldn't be surprised if THN puts Carrier or Herbert in the top-10 due to their post-draft numbers.
 

Qvist

Registered User
Apr 14, 2009
2,357
0
You people don't actually take THN seriously, do you? Relax about correcting rankings, these clowns are the high school paper of prospect coverage.

Read up on what you're talking about Einstein. It's not in fact THN who ranks - the FW ranking is compiled from lists submitted by roughly 20 NHL scouts, in addition to which top 10 rankings for each team come directly from the team. Call me old-fashioned, but for my part I attach rather more weight to that as a reasonably reliable expression of the consensus in the NHL scouting community than I do to.....any other publicly available assessment actually.
 

Minister of Offence

Registered User
Oct 2, 2009
24,407
0
www.chadhargrove.com
Also the good writers get the info directly from the team... I know for example the Yotes, Hawks and Habs lists come from the top of the organization.

I thought our individual team rankings were quite spot on...made me think they probably came from the team or someone that follows the organization closely.

It's some of the overall rankings that are always jokes. Regardless, look back in 5 years and you see why there isn't much point in putting stock in it.
 

Qvist

Registered User
Apr 14, 2009
2,357
0
I thought our individual team rankings were quite spot on...made me think they probably came from the team or someone that follows the organization closely.

It's some of the overall rankings that are always jokes. Regardless, look back in 5 years and you see why there isn't much point in putting stock in it.

Actually, if you look back five years, what you'll find is a very strong correlation between those rankings and actual results. So much so that it would be quite justified to argue that prospects that make the THN top 75 list is the only group that has a very significant likelihood of becoming good NHL players. Only a small fraction of the top 10 prospects who make the team list but not the top 75 makes it in the NHL, while a considerable majority of the top 75 group does so (and an overwhelming majority of the top 50). Considered as a prediction, it has very, very good results.

And please. For the umpteenth time, the top 75 is compiled from roughly 20 NHL scouts input. It is hence by definition an expression of views in the NHL scouting community. If the result seems like a joke to you, the problem is probably on your side.
 

DaveG

Noted Jerk
Apr 7, 2003
51,016
47,854
Winston-Salem NC
Read up on what you're talking about Einstein. It's not in fact THN who ranks - the FW ranking is compiled from lists submitted by roughly 20 NHL scouts, in addition to which top 10 rankings for each team come directly from the team. Call me old-fashioned, but for my part I attach rather more weight to that as a reasonably reliable expression of the consensus in the NHL scouting community than I do to.....any other publicly available assessment actually.

I'll have to look it up but I'm pretty sure that the top 10s come from writers that are dedicated to the individual teams rather then the teams themselves. Hence why when you see the Canes rankings it's probably going to be done by Luke DeCock rather then Paul Branecky, Kyle Hanlin, or Mike Sundheim. Now I do think they ask the organizations for input on this list but that still wouldn't make it an official organization ranking.
 

Minister of Offence

Registered User
Oct 2, 2009
24,407
0
www.chadhargrove.com
Actually, if you look back five years, what you'll find is a very strong correlation between those rankings and actual results. So much so that it would be quite justified to argue that prospects that make the THN top 75 list is the only group that has a very significant likelihood of becoming good NHL players. Only a small fraction of the top 10 prospects who make the team list but not the top 75 makes it in the NHL, while a considerable majority of the top 75 group does so (and an overwhelming majority of the top 50). Considered as a prediction, it has very, very good results.

And please. For the umpteenth time, the top 75 is compiled from roughly 20 NHL scouts input. It is hence by definition an expression of views in the NHL scouting community. If the result seems like a joke to you, the problem is probably on your side.

People put stock into these things like they are set in stone. I'm well aware they are capable of putting the best prospects in the top 75. What I don't see the point of is griping over 10-20 spots here and there, which I can be guilty of at times myself.
 

Qvist

Registered User
Apr 14, 2009
2,357
0
I'll have to look it up but I'm pretty sure that the top 10s come from writers that are dedicated to the individual teams rather then the teams themselves. Hence why when you see the Canes rankings it's probably going to be done by Luke DeCock rather then Paul Branecky, Kyle Hanlin, or Mike Sundheim. Now I do think they ask the organizations for input on this list but that still wouldn't make it an official organization ranking.

Quote from the 2009 issue:

"Each team's top 10 list of prospects - based on long-term outlook - is provided by a scout from that team, then cross-referenced and re-ordered by a panel of 22 NHL scouts".

I really don't know why there's always people who seems to have trouble believing this. The system had been the same for years and years, and has been clarified repeatedly ad nauseam on this board.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->