Prospect Info: Top 20 Flyers Prospects, #5

[Random Forest]

Why does that mean "there's no such thing as a goalie prospect"? If you're drafting and developing young goalies, those are prospects.

Also, the vast majority of NHL starting goalies proved themselves as top prospects before they made the jump. Just because the failure rate is higher and it takes longer to materialize, it doesn't make sense to ignore a goalie prospect's success and talent until they are a seasoned NHL vet.

But the vast majority of high level NHL goalies were never highly touted prospects. Only a few of the NHL's best goalies were on the map when they were 18-20 years old. Guys like Price are extremely rare. And it seems for every Price you have several more Pickards, Heleniuses, and even Fleurys.

I won't ever buy into a goalie's hype until he proves that he is NHL quality.

I'm intrigued by Stolarz, but I think we need to be extremely cautious with our expectations.

The best way to find a goaltender through the draft is to use a high volume of 3rd-7th round picks on goalies. Taking one with a high pick is risky. A goaltender can dominate at every level and flop at the NHL level. It's extremely difficult to project their transition. Goalie prospects obviously exist, but I personally refuse to put the "blue chip" label on any goalie prospect.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

But the vast majority of high level NHL goalies were never highly touted prospects. Only a few of the NHL's best goalies were on the map when they were 18-20 years old. Guys like Price are extremely rare. And it seems for every Price you have several more Pickards, Heleniuses, and even Fleurys.

I won't ever buy into a goalie's hype until he proves that he is NHL quality.

I'm intrigued by Stolarz, but I think we need to be extremely cautious with our expectations.

The best way to find a goaltender through the draft is to use a high volume of 3rd-7th round picks on goalies. Taking one with a high pick is risky. A goaltender can dominate at every level and flop at the NHL level. It's extremely difficult to project their transition. Goalie prospects obviously exist, but I personally refuse to put the "blue chip" label on any goalie prospect.

I would label John Gibson a blue-chip prospect.

 

[FlyerFire]

No matter what failure factors exist for Stolarz, all possible no doubt, he still is our highest rated and best goaltending prospect who has done fabulous so far. Anyone remember Ouelette, our number one ranked prospect years ago?

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

No matter what failure factors exist for Stolarz, all possible no doubt, he still is our highest rated and best goaltending prospect who has done fabulous so far. Anyone remember Ouelette, our number one ranked prospect years ago?

Ouellette was more than a decade ago under a different regime. It still shows that you simply don't know with goaltending prospects though, they are the ultimate wildcard.

Stolarz has all the tools to be successful in the NHL whether he actually is or not is up to him & the Flyers.

I think it's fair to rank him 5th simply because of his upside but people should be very cautiously optimistic about him & his future.

 

[Random Forest]

I would label John Gibson a blue-chip prospect.

Gibson is a promising young goaltender, but like I said, I refuse to label any goalie prospect as a "blue chipper". Many goalies have dominated at the lower levels and never had consistent success in the NHL.

With goalies, most of them are comparable in talent level. There really isn't that much separating even the best in the NHL from the worst in the NHL in terms of pure talent. The reason why some are so much better is because they have the mental fortitude to bring out that talent game to game and season to season.

I have no faith in goaltenders until they prove that they can maintain high levels of play in the NHL from season to season. We see spurts of immense talent from guys like Bryzgalov and Fleury, but the reason why they can't maintain that standard of play is because they are so weak mentally. On the other hand, goalies like Price, Ward, Lundqvist, Quick, etc. are all extremely confident in their ability, and it shows in the long term. They might have off nights, but you're never going to expect them to have a bad season. They may not dominate year in and year out, but you can expect a certain standard to be upheld.

That's why when I see Stolarz as an intriguing goalie with a promising skill set, I'm excited, but I am tempered. The same applies to Gibson, Fucale, and all the "blue chip" goaltenders. They may have high skill level, but if they don't have the right mentality, they will amount to nothing. For forwards and defenders, the same is true but to a much, much lesser extent. Players can get by on their skill level alone in many cases (not all); goalies can not.


And as an aside, this is also why I think Holtby will become a household name in the NHL for years. He just oozes confidence, and I think that is 90% of the battle for goalies.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

But the vast majority of high level NHL goalies were never highly touted prospects. Only a few of the NHL's best goalies were on the map when they were 18-20 years old. Guys like Price are extremely rare. And it seems for every Price you have several more Pickards, Heleniuses, and even Fleurys.

I won't ever buy into a goalie's hype until he proves that he is NHL quality.

I'm intrigued by Stolarz, but I think we need to be extremely cautious with our expectations.

The best way to find a goaltender through the draft is to use a high volume of 3rd-7th round picks on goalies. Taking one with a high pick is risky. A goaltender can dominate at every level and flop at the NHL level. It's extremely difficult to project their transition. Goalie prospects obviously exist, but I personally refuse to put the "blue chip" label on any goalie prospect.

I disagree. Maybe they didn't make their mark a bit later than 18 or 19, but most of the NHL goalies were top prospects.

I'm also cautious of how goalie prospects will translate to the NHL level, but I still follow their career trajectories. Besides, people should be wary of prospects of any position, not just goalies. I see a lot of posters claiming that a player can be a "second or third line player" without any perspective of what kind of players occupy those positions. It's a long trek for any prospect to not only make the NHL, but to have real value that warrants the team's patience.

And let's not put a cup-winning goalie in the same category as busts. Flyers would be super lucky to have Fleury.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

I disagree. Maybe they didn't make their mark a bit later than 18 or 19, but most of the NHL goalies were top prospects.

I'm also cautious of how goalie prospects will translate to the NHL level, but I still follow their career trajectories. Besides, people should be wary of prospects of any position, not just goalies. I see a lot of posters claiming that a player can be a "second or third line player" without any perspective of what kind of players occupy those positions. It's a long trek for any prospect to not only make the NHL, but to have real value that warrants the team's patience.

And let's not put a cup-winning goalie in the same category as busts. Flyers would be super lucky to have Fleury.

You mean the guy who's been below the .900SV% mark his last four playoffs, yup we'd be real lucky.

 

[ILoveStephanieBrown]

I disagree. Maybe they didn't make their mark a bit later than 18 or 19, but most of the NHL goalies were top prospects.

I'm also cautious of how goalie prospects will translate to the NHL level, but I still follow their career trajectories. Besides, people should be wary of prospects of any position, not just goalies. I see a lot of posters claiming that a player can be a "second or third line player" without any perspective of what kind of players occupy those positions. It's a long trek for any prospect to not only make the NHL, but to have real value that warrants the team's patience.

And let's not put a cup-winning goalie in the same category as busts. Flyers would be super lucky to have Fleury.

Are you kidding me? Most Pens fans even want him gone. Trent Dilfer won a SB. That doesn't mean he was a great qb.

 

[sa cyred]

I disagree. Maybe they didn't make their mark a bit later than 18 or 19, but most of the NHL goalies were top prospects.

I'm also cautious of how goalie prospects will translate to the NHL level, but I still follow their career trajectories. Besides, people should be wary of prospects of any position, not just goalies. I see a lot of posters claiming that a player can be a "second or third line player" without any perspective of what kind of players occupy those positions. It's a long trek for any prospect to not only make the NHL, but to have real value that warrants the team's patience.

And let's not put a cup-winning goalie in the same category as busts. Flyers would be super lucky to have Fleury.

I think most fans, Pittsbugh and non, would disagree with you. Fleury is extremelyyyyy overrated. If there is one goalie that folds under pressure, it would be MAF.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Gibson is a promising young goaltender, but like I said, I refuse to label any goalie prospect as a "blue chipper". Many goalies have dominated at the lower levels and never had consistent success in the NHL.

With goalies, most of them are comparable in talent level. There really isn't that much separating even the best in the NHL from the worst in the NHL in terms of pure talent. The reason why some are so much better is because they have the mental fortitude to bring out that talent game to game and season to season.

I have no faith in goaltenders until they prove that they can maintain high levels of play in the NHL from season to season. We see spurts of immense talent from guys like Bryzgalov and Fleury, but the reason why they can't maintain that standard of play is because they are so weak mentally. On the other hand, goalies like Price, Ward, Lundqvist, Quick, etc. are all extremely confident in their ability, and it shows in the long term. They might have off nights, but you're never going to expect them to have a bad season. They may not dominate year in and year out, but you can expect a certain standard to be upheld.

That's why when I see Stolarz as an intriguing goalie with a promising skill set, I'm excited, but I am tempered. The same applies to Gibson, Fucale, and all the "blue chip" goaltenders. They may have high skill level, but if they don't have the right mentality, they will amount to nothing. For forwards and defenders, the same is true but to a much, much lesser extent. Players can get by on their skill level alone in many cases (not all); goalies can not.


And as an aside, this is also why I think Holtby will become a household name in the NHL for years. He just oozes confidence, and I think that is 90% of the battle for goalies.

I normally wouldn't hype him up but he had a phenomenal year capped off by carrying the US team to a bronze medal as a 19 year old in the WC's. He stole the backup job off Heeter right away and then stole the starter job off of Bishop a few games in. He beat out two guys with pro experience & performed very well at a senior level tournament.

 

[Random Forest]

I disagree. Maybe they didn't make their mark a bit later than 18 or 19, but most of the NHL goalies were top prospects.

No, they weren't. Lundqvist, Rinne, Quick, etc. weren't on anybody's radar screen when they were young prospects.

A couple of them were top prospects. But many of them weren't.

I'm also cautious of how goalie prospects will translate to the NHL level, but I still follow their career trajectories. Besides, people should be wary of prospects of any position, not just goalies. I see a lot of posters claiming that a player can be a "second or third line player" without any perspective of what kind of players occupy those positions. It's a long trek for any prospect to not only make the NHL, but to have real value that warrants the team's patience.

Right, but with goaltenders, that trajectory is much harder to gauge.

In the NHL right now, you can find more elite goaltenders drafted in the later rounds than you can find elite goaltenders drafted in the first round.

Finding goaltending talent is impossibly difficult for the reason I mentioned in my last post. Because there is not really that much difference in talent between elite goaltenders and career backups. Goaltending is all mental, and it's extremely difficult to gauge a teenagers mental ability.

And let's not put a cup-winning goalie in the same category as busts. Flyers would be super lucky to have Fleury.

Just like I said before, Fleury has immense talent. In all honesty, he may be the most talented goalie in the league. That's why we've seen some incredible brilliance from him...but as I said above, talent for goaltenders doesn't mean all that much if you don't have the mental strength to go with it. He's a mess mentally and because of that, all that talent goes to waste.

 

[sobrien]

Thought hard for about 7 seconds and went Straka. Dude was a 2nd round pick for a reason. He's got NHL skill, we just need to see NHL heart and effort consistently, and at least AHL defense.



I am disappoint McGinn is higher than him

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Just like I said before, Fleury has immense talent. In all honesty, he may be the most talented goalie in the league. That's why we've seen some incredible brilliance from him...but as I said above, talent for goaltenders doesn't mean all that much if you don't have the mental strength to go with it. He's a mess mentally and because of that, all that talent goes to waste.

Steve Mason, says hi too! You know the guy we actually employ. I don't see anyone saying we'd be lucky to have him.

 

[DrHamburg]

Well, voted Stolarz. To me Cousins is a bottom 6 player. But he could be a very a good bottom 6 player (hope I am wrong and he becomes a scorer in the NHL) but Stolarz could be a starting goalie. What is the ruling on MA Bourdon? Should he count? He is an NHL defensemen if he could stay healthy I would say.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

No, they weren't. Lundqvist, Rinne, Quick, etc. weren't on anybody's radar screen when they were young prospects.

A couple of them were top prospects. But many of them weren't.

You're right about Rinne, but not about Lundqvist and Quick. They were pretty hyped before they entered the league.

Right, but with goaltenders, that trajectory is much harder to gauge.

In the NHL right now, you can find more elite goaltenders drafted in the later rounds than you can find elite goaltenders drafted in the first round.

Finding goaltending talent is impossibly difficult for the reason I mentioned in my last post. Because there is not really that much difference in talent between elite goaltenders and career backups. Goaltending is all mental, and it's extremely difficult to gauge a teenagers mental ability.

Goaltending prospects take longer to develop, that's why so many late-round goalie picks are late bloomers. Also, so many of them don't have starting jobs when they are draft age, so it's really difficult for scouts to gage their talent. A year or so after they are drafted, you can get a real sense of which goalie picks have real potential and which ones will likely bust completely.

Also, it's not all mental. Having fortitude is important for maintaining a successful career, but talent and athleticism play a hugely important role that shouldn't be overlooked.

Just like I said before, Fleury has immense talent. In all honesty, he may be the most talented goalie in the league. That's why we've seen some incredible brilliance from him...but as I said above, talent for goaltenders doesn't mean all that much if you don't have the mental strength to go with it. He's a mess mentally and because of that, all that talent goes to waste.

Flyers fans shouldn't be laughing at anyone's goalies. I'd take Fleury over our patchwork solution any day. He may not be among the elite, but he's still a legitimate #1.

 

[Damaged Goods]

Why does that mean "there's no such thing as a goalie prospect"? If you're drafting and developing young goalies, those are prospects.

Also, the vast majority of NHL starting goalies proved themselves as top prospects before they made the jump. Just because the failure rate is higher and it takes longer to materialize, it doesn't make sense to ignore a goalie prospect's success and talent until they are a seasoned NHL vet.

Google the phrase "there's no such thing as a pitching prospect." You're taking this expression too literally.

 

[Random Forest]

You're right about Rinne, but not about Lundqvist and Quick. They were pretty hyped before they entered the league.

They were pretty hyped when they entered the league and started turning heads. Not a moment before. At no point were they considered "blue chip" prospects. Their stocks may have risen relative to their draft day, but nobody expected either of them to become all star goaltenders until they were actually proving it.

Goaltending prospects take longer to develop, that's why so many late-round goalie picks are late bloomers. Also, so many of them don't have starting jobs when they are draft age, so it's really difficult for scouts to gage their talent. A year or so after they are drafted, you can get a real sense of which goalie picks have real potential and which ones will likely bust completely.

Right, no problems here. I think we're on the same page more than we realize. What I'm saying is that I am not sold on any goaltender until I see proof of consistent ability.

Fleury is example #1 of a hot and cold goaltender. If I'm building a team, I would rather have a consistently average goaltender than one that can be a Vezina goalie one year and a glorified backup the next. When you're constructing your team, you need to adjust based on what you have in net. If you don't know what you have in net, well, it makes things difficult both on the ice and from a managerial perspective. The Penguins in this years playoffs epitomize this point.

Above all else, I value consistency in a goalie. Which leads me to this point...

Also, it's not all mental. Having fortitude is important for maintaining a successful career, but talent and athleticism play a hugely important role that shouldn't be overlooked.

Being consistent is all about mental strength, though. Bryzgalov had plenty of talent and athleticism, and look where it's gotten him now. Fleury has possibly the best talent and athleticism in the league, and Penguins fans are dreading having him in net next season.

Very little separates the great goaltenders from the bad in the NHL in terms of overall talent. It's all about getting a consistent standard of play, and I truly believe that that is all mental. And I think that's why goaltenders take so long to develop. At the lower levels, goaltenders can get by on straight up talent. When you move up the ranks, though, you need more than just talent because the actual difference between you and your backup is actually very small.

Flyers fans shouldn't be laughing at anyone's goalies. I'd take Fleury over our patchwork solution any day. He may not be among the elite, but he's still a legitimate #1.

I'd take Emery at his price over Fleury at his. We know what we're going to get with Emery, and we can adjust our team accordingly. With Bryzgalov, we never knew what we were going to get on a day to day basis. Same thing with Pittsburgh and Fleury.


Let me put it this way, when you're in your own zone on defense, your job is to try and limit the opposition's quality scoring chances. Each decision you make is a bet, and you're betting that the opposing player will have a weaker opportunity than if you had made another decision. When you don't have the slightest clue whether your goaltender can stop a lesser opportunity, you're left guessing and no longer 'playing the odds'. That's when you enter scramble mode in the D zone because you really don't know what decision to make. Let me ask you, how many times were the Flyers in scramble mode last season? Lots. Lots and lots.

In my experience playing competitive hockey, I've found that it is much easier playing in front of a consistently good goalie than in front of an inconsistent goalie who may be incredible at times and mediocre at others.

I'm pretty tired right now, so I don't know if what I said above makes much sense. I understand it all in my head, but I don't know if I've explained it very well, so apologies if you can't really grasp what I'm trying to say. It's probably my fault.

 

[dats81]

Stolarz based on upside.
But he could just as easily drop off the map and never be heard of again as many other former Flyers goalie prospects.

McGinn or Cousins next.

 

[flyerfanish]

I don't know for sure, but it seems with goalies, there's also a higher injury risk. Like DiPietro, Nitty, Varlamov(?), Emery, Hiller, etc.

 

[Flyerss]

Stolarz based on upside.
But he could just as easily drop off the map and never be heard of again as many other former Flyers goalie prospects.

McGinn or Cousins next.

I hope that's not going to be the case

 

[JoeFlyer]

Went with Stolarz. The kid has already made a few tough decisions about where to play, etc, and seems to have taken things in his stride so he appears have a level head on him and understands what it takes. He improved a lot over the past year or so and he's still only 19. Good size too. From things I've read / seen it seems as though he has all the right ingredients to keep progressing towards a crack at the NHL...

 

[Patrick Division]

What up Cuz?

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

I'm suprised McGinn isn't getting more votes. People are ready to pencil him in as the third line winger on this team, but he isn't in the top five for prospects? I get not being higher than Laughton, Morin, and Haag, but he's gotta be at least #4 or #5.

 

[BernieParent]

Drat, I voted Stolarz with all the cool kids.

Like many others have said, until he makes a case for playing in the NHL, I'll keep my expectations well tempered. Fortunately, Stolarz is presently in an excellent hockey environment with a winning attitude, and should be well mentored on continuing to mature and develop.

Re: goalie prospects, there's also something to be said about having a competitive AHL team as an element for good player development. A farm club focused on properly developing talent doesn't want superior prospects executing the right plays on offense and defense, only to watch yet another soft goal go by the sieve in nets.

 

[FlyersFan61290]

I'm suprised McGinn isn't getting more votes. People are ready to pencil him in as the third line winger on this team, but he isn't in the top five for prospects? I get not being higher than Laughton, Morin, and Haag, but he's gotta be at least #4 or #5.

I think McGinn is best suited on the 4th line. I see Cousins, Stollarz and Straka all being the better player long term assuming they commit to working hard like McGinn has.