Who do you want to KEEP on the Summer Prospect List?

[Thirty One]

Old HF rules please!!

Two GDTs!

 

[Machinehead]

I voted remove/don't add on all of them.

They're all either roster players with virtually no chance of going down or career AHL players.

 

[eco's bones]

To me you have standards or you don't have them and if you don't the whole thing is f***ed.

Chytil and Howden are over 65 games. I'm sorry--that's it. They're graduated. Same with Lemieux. Once you hit 26 years old--you're done--so Fogarty and Gilmour should be off the list too.

The only one who should be on is Bigras--and I don't get this thing--'if the Rangers re-sign him'--he was Hartford's best d-man last year until he got hurt. He's a good player and I don't see why we wouldn't re-sign him--that is unless we traded him.

If Georgiev falls within the threshold that he could be added to the list he should be added to it.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

To me you have standards or you don't have them and if you don't the whole thing is ****ed.

Chytil and Howden are over 65 games. I'm sorry--that's it. They're graduated. Same with Lemieux. Once you hit 26 years old--you're done--so Fogarty and Gilmour should be off the list too.

The only one who should be on is Bigras--and I don't get this thing--'if the Rangers re-sign him'--he was Hartford's best d-man last year until he got hurt. He's a good player and I don't see why we wouldn't re-sign him--that is unless we traded him.

If Georgiev falls within the threshold that he could be added to the list he should be added to it.

Georgiev misses the cutoff by 2 games and Howden misses the cutoff by 2 games. I just find it silly that one stays on. Taking the hf Criteria way too serious imo but we will do what the majority wants.

Regardless we will likely keep everyone out of the official, and make a second unofficial list with all the young players to see where they fall. Everyone is happy.

And Bigras is considered graduated, hes a former CHL player at the age of 24.

 

[Alluckks]

Two GDTs!

Please God; I absolutely loath the one GDT turned into a Post-GDT
We get so stingy here about post counts but I'll go over to other forum's that I won't call out and they'll have threads 10,000+ posts deep without any mods closing them, yet it is just too much traffic for us to create a second dang thread for post-game

 

[Alluckks]

If we want to marvel at our young assets then we should just do a "Under 21 or less than 41 NHL games played" ranking poll...

 

[The Crypto Guy]

If we want to marvel at our young assets then we should just do a "Under 21 or less than 41 NHL games played" ranking poll...

No we want to see where people rank all our young players. Not “Marvel” over them. We already know what we have.

 

[Alluckks]

No we want to see where people rank all our young players. Not “Marvel” over them. We already know what we have.

It was a joke

 

[The Crypto Guy]

It was a joke

Gotcha. Didn't come across as one.

 

[Alluckks]

Gotcha. Didn't come across as one.

It was just sarcasm about the big debate over what we want to qualify as a prospect; at the end of the day I assume people will have their own agenda as to what they see as a 'prospect' regardless whether or not the majority chooses to include them here - and it just seemed funny that we were voting on it on a case by case basis for each player rather than simply voting on criteria to be universally applicable

 

[The Crypto Guy]

It was just sarcasm about the big debate over what we want to qualify as a prospect; at the end of the day I assume people will have their own agenda as to what they see as a 'prospect' regardless whether or not the majority chooses to include them here - and it just seemed funny that we were voting on it on a case by case basis for each player rather than simply voting on criteria to be universally applicable

We’ve had exceptions in the past, we havent always been following the criteria. That’s why the poll was made. It’s nothing new but we just had quite a few players this time around who were right on the line.

 

[bobbop]

You have your answers

 

[eco's bones]

We could always do a 1997 and younger ranking separate from it. It's not like we don't have the time.

 

[mas0764]

The results are surprising.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

The results are surprising.

No worries, we will have an unofficial list where I add a few of the younger players in. When we hit 10 i'll have a poll where you would put Chytil and Howden. Maybe at 15 a poll for Lemieux. They will be kept off the official list though.

There are a bunch of us that would like to see where we rank all our top young players and not exclude them because they played a few too many games.

 

[mas0764]

I am in that latter group.... to me a player like Chytil or Howden simply has not reached anywhere close to their development limit and thus really need to be in the prospect camp more than the veteran camp.

I know that is subjective and would create endless arguments but I think in this case it makes sense.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

No worries, we will have an unofficial list where I add a few of the younger players in. When we hit 10 i'll have a poll where you would put Chytil and Howden. Maybe at 15 a poll for Lemieux. They will be kept off the official list though.

There are a bunch of us that would like to see where we rank all our top young players and not exclude them because they played a few too many games.

This seems like a good solution.

Note: I'd be fine with picking some other system (e.g. forwards must be under 23, defensemen under 24, goalies under 25, or something like that), but if we were going to do it, then we should all agree to those new criteria – and then stick to those.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

This seems like a good solution.

Note: I'd be fine with picking some other system (e.g. forwards must be under 23, defensemen under 24, goalies under 25, or something like that), but if we were going to do it, then we should all agree to those new criteria – and then stick to those.

I can propose something for the next time around, but I have a strong feeling people will just continue to vote for the old criteria, especially based on these results.

 

[darko]

I'm persnickety. I say we go by the letter of the old rules.

I agree. Chytil and Howden shouldn't be eligible. Bigras is too old. Gilmour is UFA. Lemieux is ineligible.

 

[darko]

I voted remove/don't add on all of them.

They're all either roster players with virtually no chance of going down or career AHL players.

Yup.

I think people want to include Howden and Chytil just so they can make a case for us having #1 prospect pool.

 

[Machinehead]

Yup.

I think people want to include Howden and Chytil just so they can make a case for us having #1 prospect pool.

I think we might have the best group of "youngsters" or whatever which is more important to me anyway.

To me, you can't judge a team's position by "prospects" (by the official definition) alone. Kakko, for example, will never really be a "prospect." He'll surpass graduation criteria his first year. But a graduated Kakko > any 19yo prospect.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Yup.

I think people want to include Howden and Chytil just so they can make a case for us having #1 prospect pool.

People want to see where these players rank within our team, this has nothing to do with other players and other teams prospects.

 

[darko]

People want to see where these players rank within our team, this has nothing to do with other players and other teams prospects.

I wonder where Vesey and Skjei would rank.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

I wonder where Vesey and Skjei would rank.

Not sure how 25-26 year old players going on their 4th and 5th year compare?

 

[darko]

Not sure how 25-26 year old players going on their 4th and 5th year compare?

Just seeing where they rank within the team. Both are about as eligible as Chytil and Howden.