In retrospect it might have been better to have Salmonsson a 7 or 7.5, but were it not for an injury, he would have been taken a lot higher. He has the skills, speed, and smarts to be an impact player in the NHL.
I would probably make Michalek higher than a 7.5.
Jacobv2 said:
I think the number rankings are kind of lame.
But MKN, I agree with your rankings otherwise.
I would say that they are more too much open to interpretation. Too many people look at rankings and think that a prospect will fill that potential, when in fact the opposite is true. Most prospects fail, the majority are unable to fufill their potential.
I did my rankings based on how good the player could be, not how they will be. Most of them will never even have a small NHL carreer.
SwOOsh said:
8's for Welch and Salmonsson?? Malkin the same rating as Ovechkin? OKay....
Yeah, 8 for Welch who may be even a little better than Whitney. He's got great size for a defensemen and good offensive and defensive skills.
8 as I said above is probably too high for Salmonsson. I think he definitely has the potential to be a scoring line forward.
9 for Malkin. 9, according to the chart I used, means star potential. Most would agree that Malkin has star potential.
FreakyHabsFan said:
Well, I will say it: YOU'RE RANKINGS ARE TO HIGH! That don't make to much sence for me...
Which ones do you think are too high?
Gifford and Christensen should probably be bumped down a notch, and Salmonsson is a little high, but other than that I don't see how my ranking are too high based on potential.
Anyways, let's not turn this into another my prospect is better than yours thread, I was just providing what the original poster asked for, and copied the whole depth chart I had already made right after the draft.