Prospect Info: Who is the #13 Ranked Blues Prospect?

[Bluesnatic27]

Zach Sanford takes the #12 spot with a commanding lead. Looks like it will be a dog fight between Perunovich and Toropchenko for the #13 spot. But maybe Stevens will finally get some love. Let's find out, shall we?

Blues Prospect List:
1) Robert Thomas (92.1%)
2) Jordan Kyrou (87.4%)
3) Ville Husso (56.4%)
4) Klim Kostin (52.0%)
5) Dominik Bokk (73.4%)
6) Jordan Schmaltz (36.8%)
7) Jake Walman (49.0%)
8) Samuel Blais (32.3%)
9) Niko Mikkola (48.0%)
10) Erik Foley (51.9%)
11) Evan Fitzpatrick (36.4%)
12) Zach Sanford (56.1%)

Click to read more...

 

[RandallRitchey]

Toropchenko again.

 

[stl76]

Perunovich again.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Stevens for me.

 

[tfriede2]

Perunovich

 

[MU_Beerman]

Stevens, I feel like we've seen similar offense to what Backes showed in college, if he can get the skating figured out like 42 did we could really have something.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Between Stevens and Perunovich for me.

The real wildcard in this range IMO is Reinke. I’ve seen very little of him. There was the 1 NHL game he was thrust into but Mich Tech is hardly ever on tv. Anyone here happen to have seen much of him?

The scouting report sounds alright but until I see how he looks in San Antonio, I’m really just guessing with Reinke.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Stevens, I feel like we've seen similar offense to what Backes showed in college, if he can get the skating figured out like 42 did we could really have something.

Stevens will likely be getting my vote in this poll but this seems a little lofty to me. They put up similar points in college but the NHL translatable skills just aren’t the same. Backes brought more. Stevens played with 2 great linemates whereas Backes was more on his own.

That said, I like Stevens and think he’s got a good shot of developing into a useful bottom-6 forward. No elite tool but good skill, size, willingness to use it and crash the net.

 

[Ranksu]

Musil for me

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Stevens for me.

I have to go Stevens too... Probably Toropchenko...then to be honest...the rest are just guys. Poganski/Reinke as my last NHL prospect as fillers. I thought Reinke looked much better as a college player than Perunovich, but I didn't expect him to be signed outside of an AHL deal. Perunovich is just going to have to hit a mystery growth spurt or we really wasted a high pick. I don't think he would've been drafted above round five. I watch college hockey and....he wasn't THE guy on his team...he was just one of the THE guys on his own team. I thought he was a liability defensively in college watching him play. Typically, a college team is lucky to have one NHLer on it.

 

[The Note in MI]

Feel like Binnington is lost at the bottom

 

[Stealth JD]

Perunovich
Stevens
Binny
Reinke
Musil


Toropchenko maybe after those 5. Maybe.

 

[Chief Steele]

Toropchenko again.

 

[Stealth JD]

I have to go Stevens too... Probably Toropchenko...then to be honest...the rest are just guys. Poganski/Reinke as my last NHL prospect as fillers. I thought Reinke looked much better as a college player than Perunovich, but I didn't expect him to be signed outside of an AHL deal. Perunovich is just going to have to hit a mystery growth spurt or we really wasted a high pick. I don't think he would've been drafted above round five. I watch college hockey and....he wasn't THE guy on his team...he was just one of the THE guys on his own team. I thought he was a liability defensively in college watching him play. Typically, a college team is lucky to have one NHLer on it.

No offense...but most of this is horseshit. You don't lead the team in scoring as a freshman defenseman, while winning a National Championship wihtout being "THE" guy guy on his team. Guys like Pronman & Wheeler (not to mention Bill Armstrong) were very high on Perunovich after his recent development, so the "fifth round" comment is just stupid.

 

[wannabebluesplayer]

I voted Toropchenko again, but Perunovich would have been my actual choice had Sanford not won at #12. I didn't think Sanford should still be considered a prospect, and I still don't. It is what it is though, Toropchenko at 12 and Perunovich would be my next.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I voted Toropchenko again, but Perunovich would have been my actual choice had Sanford not won at #12. I didn't think Sanford should still be considered a prospect, and I still don't. It is what it is though, Toropchenko at 12 and Perunovich would be my next.

I’m not sure I understand how Sanford had any bearing over choosing either Perunovich or Toropchenko.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

No offense...but most of this is horse****. You don't lead the team in scoring as a freshman defenseman, while winning a National Championship wihtout being "THE" guy guy on his team. Guys like Pronman & Wheeler (not to mention Bill Armstrong) were very high on Perunovich after his recent development, so the "fifth round" comment is just stupid.

Let's hope they are right...We shall see. Final central scouting rank 102. 124 at midterm for an undersized defensemen. We picked him 45. Doesn't fall to 107 or 138? It was his second year of eligibility.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Let's hope they are right...We shall see. Final central scouting rank 102. 124 at midterm for an undersized defensemen. We picked him 45. Doesn't fall to 107 or 138? It was his second year of eligibility.

Third year of eligibility, actually. He was passed over in both 2016 and 2017.

I share a lot of your concerns, FWIW.

 

[Ranksu]

I voted Toropchenko again, but Perunovich would have been my actual choice had Sanford not won at #12. I didn't think Sanford should still be considered a prospect, and I still don't. It is what it is though, Toropchenko at 12 and Perunovich would be my next.

Well, Schmaltz is going to be October 8th 25-years old and he's still listed as prospect in here. I found this what qualify as rookie. Hockey future

Rookie Qualifications
To be considered a rookie, a player must not have played in more than 25 NHL games in any preceding seasons, nor in six or more NHL games in each of any two preceding seasons. Any player at least 26 years of age (by September 15th of that season) is not considered a rookie.

and hockey future had this kind of criteria for prospect

A player will be considered a prospect until he meets the following criteria:
If a prospect is a skater (forward, defenseman) and has played in 65 NHL games or more before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday; or, if a goaltender has played in 45 NHL games before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday, that player will be considered graduated to the NHL. Conversely, if a player completes the season of his 24th birthday without passing those milestones, then that player will no longer be considered a prospect by Hockey’s Future, regardless of the player’s status with his NHL club.

 

[EastonBlues22]

No offense...but most of this is horse****. You don't lead the team in scoring as a freshman defenseman, while winning a National Championship wihtout being "THE" guy guy on his team. Guys like Pronman & Wheeler (not to mention Bill Armstrong) were very high on Perunovich after his recent development, so the "fifth round" comment is just stupid.

He was relied upon pretty heavily in the offensive zone and on the PP, but they did an awful lot to shelter him defensively with their usage of him and overall team structure. He was definitely not THE guy for defensive zone starts (or defending in general) or on the PK.

I don't think suggesting he's a 5th rounder is radically more "out there" than suggesting he was a mid-2nd rounder. He seemed to me like he should go in the 3rd or 4th round, and many seemed to have him pegged in that range. (The consensus rankings I saw consistently put him just outside the top 100.) I don't know where Pronman and Wheeler had him ranked, but they seemed to be higher on Perunovich than most. I'm sure I can find a couple of opinions that were more dour that would make a second round ranking look fairly radical (like Central Scouting, for example).

What I'm getting at is that how you grade him swings pretty heavily depending on whether your focus is on being optimistic about what he brings to the table or pessimistic about his flaws. It seems a bit early to be saying that one side of that divide's opinion is dumb.

 

[Caser]

Toropchenko, add Sergeyev.

 

[Stealth JD]

What I'm getting at is that how you grade him swings pretty heavily depending on whether your focus is on being optimistic about what he brings to the table or pessimistic about his flaws. It seems a bit early to be saying that one side of that divide's opinion is dumb.

I don't have any problem if somebody wants to say the guy will be a bust, is a huge risk, or is fifth-round talent. What I said is stupid, and I still stand by, is saying they guy otherwise would have been on the board in round 5 had the Blues not taken him. If that's the case the Blues drastically overvalued the guy, similar to how Boston did with Senyshyn in '15 or Hickey by LA in '07. Those picks were immediately questioned and have only proven to be valid criticisms. But most of the post-draft grades had the Blues doing well in the first 2 rounds and very little grumbling about the pick being a "reach" or considered "off-the-board". By that time many of pre-draft publications had taken notice of Perunovich's steps forward in development and considered him a legitimate prospect for the 2018 draft, regardless of having previously been draft eligible.

To criticize the Blues for using a 2nd round pick on the guy is fair. But without knowing who's scouting who, who's talking to who, which teams are following what guys, etc. it's foolish to definitively state "he would have been there later". The Blues seem to have a pretty good feel for knowing what other teams like their guys (Oshie, Schwartz) or when they feel as though they can let a guy slide because he's 'under-scouted' (Parayko). It's an insult to the front office to say that they have no sense of when it's a good time to use their pick on the guy that they want, and implies that the most-connected folks in the world of professional and amateur hockey have no knowledge of any other team's interest in a guy.

I'm cool with disagreeing on somebody's talent level. But that's completely different than implying incompetence or ignorance.

 

[Oberyn]

I don't have any problem if somebody wants to say the guy will be a bust, is a huge risk, or is fifth-round talent. What I said is stupid, and I still stand by, is saying they guy otherwise would have been on the board in round 5 had the Blues not taken him. If that's the case the Blues drastically overvalued the guy, similar to how Boston did with Zboril in '15 or Hickey by LA in '07. Those picks were immediately questioned and have only proven to be valid criticisms. But most of the post-draft grades had the Blues doing well in the first 2 rounds and very little grumbling about the pick being a "reach" or considered "off-the-board". By that time many of pre-draft publications had taken notice of Perunovich's steps forward in development and considered him a legitimate prospect for the 2018 draft, regardless of having previously been draft eligible.

The criticize the Blues using a 2nd round pick on the guy is fair. But without knowing who's scouting who, who's talking to who, which teams are following what guys, etc. it's foolish to definitively state "he would have been there later". The Blues seem to have a pretty good feel for knowing what other teams like their guys (Oshie, Schwartz) or when they feel as though they can let a guy slide because he's 'under-scouted' (Parayko). It's an insult to the front office to say that they have no sense of when it's a good time to use their pick on the guy that they want, and implies that the most-connected folks in the world of professional and amateur hockey have no knowledge of any other team's interest in a guy.

I'm cool with disagreeing on somebody's talent level. But that's completely different than implying incompetence or ignorance.

Just want to mention that Zboril was a fine pick and was projected to go in the first round, I believe he was ranked 14th or 15th on Bob's final ranking list. I'm guessing you meant to say Senyshyn who was predicted to go in the 2nd round.

Regarding Perunovich, I wasn't too happy with taking him with our 2nd if I'm being honest. I would've been fine with taking him in the 3rd round, but we used that pick to move up for Bokk. I've always been a little wary on taking overagers with early picks, and being an undersized defenseman gives me some cause for concern. If Perunovich was a more fluid skater I would feel more comfortable with the pick, but from what I've seen, that's not a strong suit in his game. I think he's more likely to bust than pan out, but I'm still rooting for him to make it.

 

[Stealth JD]

Just want to mention that Zboril was a fine pick and was projected to go in the first round, I believe he was ranked 14th or 15th on Bob's final ranking list. I'm guessing you meant to say Senyshyn who was predicted to go in the 2nd round.

Regarding Perunovich, I wasn't too happy with taking him with our 2nd if I'm being honest. I would've been fine with taking him in the 3rd round, but we used that pick to move up for Bokk. I've always been a little wary on taking overagers with early picks, and being an undersized defenseman gives me some cause for concern. If Perunovich was a more fluid skater I would feel more comfortable with the pick, but from what I've seen, that's not a strong suit in his game. I think he's more likely to bust than pan out, but I'm still rooting for him to make it.

Thanks, you're right. I was definitely thinking of Senyshyn. Both he and Zboril both look like bad picks today considering who was left on the board at the time, but Senyshyn was definitely the bigger reach.

 

[simon IC]

Toropchenko, but I am reconsidering. I think Nolan Stevens is more likely to be an NHL'er, despite a smaller toolbox.