Prospect Info: Who is the Canucks #5 prospect?

[Vankiller Whale]

Regardless of whether or not he's a prospect, you shouldn't just ignore him once he's on the poll. According to the standards of this poll, he is a prospect. If you want to see it as "best young players with less than x NHL GP" instead of a prospect, then go ahead.

Honestly I think this should be redone with a clear definition.

 

[JumpierPegasus]

If people aren't going to vote for him because he "isn't a prospect", then he will be much lower than he should be. According to HF, he is still a prospect, therefore he should be voted on as such

Otherwise we'll see to much muddling of votes, personally I think he should be next, but he might not be for a while with people not voting for him

 

[Saturated Fats]

K well, I'm wanting to take Schroeder out for next round. It isn't worth the headache, and is muddling active and fun discussion about the other prospects (which is the intention of these polls/threads)

 

[Hammer79]

K well, I'm taking Schroeder out for next round. It isn't worth the headache, and is muddling active and fun discussion about the other prospects (which is the intention of these polls/threads)

You'll get arguments if you take him out. Just leave him in and stick with Hockey's Future criteria. I don't think he's dropped lower than he otherwise would have anyway. His rookie season wasn't very productive, and this guy needs offensive production to make an impact. Schroeder is a 'top 6 or bust' player.

 

[MS]

K well, I'm taking Schroeder out for next round. It isn't worth the headache, and is muddling active and fun discussion about the other prospects (which is the intention of these polls/threads)

Schroeder is *clearly* still a prospect. He's 23, has 30 career NHL games (which is about half the HF prospect threshold) and finished the year in the AHL. Not voting for him because you have a different definition of a 'prospect' than the site you're voting on or the majority of other posters is just ridiculous.

In any case, Schroeder hasn't fallen yet. He might be closer to the NHL than others, but there's no way in hell he has more trade value than any of the 5 guys that were ranked ahead of him. I'll be voting for him next at #6, which is where he probably should be.

 

[thefeebster]

Being OP for these threads is such a thankless job. Thanks SonicY.

We included Tanev last year and IIRC, he was only two games under the threshold. Schroeder is well below the GP threshold level and thus should be included. I think he goes in the next poll.

 

[Nuckles]

K well, I'm wanting to take Schroeder out for next round. It isn't worth the headache, and is muddling active and fun discussion about the other prospects (which is the intention of these polls/threads)

Then you should take out Lack too. HF doesn't even consider him a prospect anymore.

 

[Hammer79]

You can choose to vote for Schroeder or not but clearly he is still a prospect and should be on the list. If it weren't for recent arrivals Horvat and Gaunce this may well have been his year to make the club and still may be but it will be tougher for sure.

If he doesn't make the club, he'll probably be plucked off of waivers if he isn't traded.

Then you should take out Lack too. HF doesn't even consider him a prospect anymore.

Yes I agree, Lack needs to be removed.

 

[Verviticus]

We included Tanev last year and IIRC, he was only two games under the threshold.

this was also a bad decision!

 

[thefeebster]

this was also a bad decision!

We need consistency. Can't go switching based on yours or a selected minority's whim. We've voted based on HF rules in the past, we should now.

Leave it as is and hope the whining subsides.

 

[arshonagon]

We need consistency. Can't go switching based on yours or a selected minority's whim. We've voted based on HF rules in the past, we should now.

Leave it as is and hope the whining subsides.

Ya, just use the HF categorization of what a prospect is and state that in the first post. Makes it impossible for people to argue about it then and should keep it more on track for the point of the thread. Also to that point, Lack should be removed then do to age.

As for this vote, I have been voting Gaunce since #3 so he is still my vote. To me, if him and Schroeder reach top potential I would still take Gaunce over Schroeder on my team as I would see his skill set as being more useful. I also think he has less of a chance of "busting" then Schroeder does.

 

[Intoewsables]

Close between Schroeder and Gaunce but I went with Jordan.

 

[m9]

Schroeder is *clearly* still a prospect. He's 23, has 30 career NHL games (which is about half the HF prospect threshold) and finished the year in the AHL. Not voting for him because you have a different definition of a 'prospect' than the site you're voting on or the majority of other posters is just ridiculous.

In any case, Schroeder hasn't fallen yet. He might be closer to the NHL than others, but there's no way in hell he has more trade value than any of the 5 guys that were ranked ahead of him. I'll be voting for him next at #6, which is where he probably should be.

Yup, all this. I don't get the complaining.

 

[denkiteki]

Then you should take out Lack too. HF doesn't even consider him a prospect anymore.

Agreed... been saying this a few times but like i said earlier, it won't matter till #6 anyways. If JS is removed, Lack is pretty much NHL or gone next year too since if he doesn't play 28 games, he comes a UFA and probably goes to a situation where he has a chance of making a NHL team. When your situation (due to waiver/contract status) is pretty much forces you to be in the NHL, i would argue you graduate from being a prospect (regardless of rather or not they are listed as a prospect on HF).

Voted Gaunce this morning since he's younger than JS and at this point would probably be JS's main competition (along with Horvat) for the 3rd line.

 

[Blue Suede Shoes]

I still say Eddie Lack should be #5. He would be higher on my list if he had played the year, and maintained his high level of play. I think GoalieGuild has him ranked around #5 of the best goalie prospects in the world, despite missing most of a year. The only question for me is whether or not he'll be able to return to usual form. Because of that uncertainty, he is almost interchangeable with Gaunce and Schroeder at #5 ranking.

Between Gaunce and Schroeder, it is so hard for me to choose one. Almost dead even. But I think I lean towards Schroeder, just because he showed that he can play at the highest level last year. And think he has more to give. I see both him and Gaunce as having 2nd line potential, but both having fairly safe floors as 3rd liners.


I vote Lack.

 

[denkiteki]

I still say Eddie Lack should be #5. He would be higher on my list if he had played the year, and maintained his high level of play. I think GoalieGuild has him ranked around #5 of the best goalie prospects in the world, despite missing most of a year. The only question for me is whether or not he'll be able to return to usual form. Because of that uncertainty, he is almost interchangeable with Gaunce and Schroeder at #5 ranking.

Between Gaunce and Schroeder, it is so hard for me to choose one. Almost dead even. But I think I lean towards Schroeder, just because he showed that he can play at the highest level last year. And think he has more to give. I see both him and Gaunce as having 2nd line potential, but both having fairly safe floors as 3rd liners.


I vote Lack.

They actually ranked him #4 in April but its really a meaningless ranking and just another opinion. I mean they ranked Gibson as #10... but i would take him over Lack in an instant (and i'm sure anyone that watched him play probably would too and even ranked him 34 before the update...).

Another argument against having Lack or JS as prospects is would ZK be also considered a prospect if either of them are still considered prospects? He's younger than Lack and has 83 games of NHL experience (more than JS but not a lot more given how many of those games were actually on the 4th line). On top of that, pretty much same age as JS. Then if you include ZK, Tanev doesn't actually have much more experience and is only a year older but still younger than Lack.

 

[Verviticus]

they also said sergei bobrovsky was not going to have a successful year in columbus and then deleted the article when he got nominated for the vezina. oops.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Being OP for these threads is such a thankless job. Thanks SonicY.

We included Tanev last year and IIRC, he was only two games under the threshold. Schroeder is well below the GP threshold level and thus should be included. I think he goes in the next poll.

Agreed. Good on you SonicY.

Also agreed on the games played threshold, and leaving Schroeder in.

 

[shottasasa]

I'm pretty sure we are going by Hockey's Future rules here.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/whatmakesaprospect/



Under these rules, Schroeder is a prospect so you should vote accordingly.

I would extend the max age for a goalie prospect to 25 as they can take longer to develop (Jimmy Howard and Corey Crawford's first full time seasons in the NHL didn't come until after their 25th birthday).

But seeing as this has turned in to an extended argument, it may be necessary to just stick to the HF definitions as a hard and fast rule, like it or lump it.

 

[The Optimist]

Regardless of whether or not he's a prospect, you shouldn't just ignore him once he's on the poll. .

That's the great thing about democracy - I can do what I want!

I voted for Guance because like many others, I'm willfully ignorant of Schroeder's inclusion in the poll.

 

[denkiteki]

I would extend the max age for a goalie prospect to 25 as they can take longer to develop (Jimmy Howard and Corey Crawford's first full time seasons in the NHL didn't come until after their 25th birthday).

But seeing as this has turned in to an extended argument, it may be necessary to just stick to the HF definitions as a hard and fast rule, like it or lump it.

I guess if we are using that definition then JS should win #6 and Lack be removed. Otherwise it'll probably be close between the 2 of them because clearly both of them right now are front runners to make the team as 3C and backup goalie. Guess we'll see what the OP decides to do on the next poll and rather both are included or 1/both are excluded. Once both of them are out, it'll get quite interesting given there is a clear drop in terms of talent (or at least NHL projection, we do have some boom/bust prospects with talent but a lot of thing needs to go right for them to reach their potential, i.e. Subban could be a top 4 dman but needs a lot of things to go his way in terms of development).

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

JS = Prospect
Lack = Prospect, even though he's 25, as mentioned, goalies are going to be older.

ZK was a prospect still last year, and he'd played about as many games as Schroeder has at this point.

 

[member 105785]

Gaunce will win this but I went with Lack

 

[Shareefruck]

Regardless of whether or not he's a prospect, you shouldn't just ignore him once he's on the poll. According to the standards of this poll, he is a prospect. If you want to see it as "best young players with less than x NHL GP" instead of a prospect, then go ahead.

Honestly I think this should be redone with a clear definition.

I don't agree on a logical level. If you don't think he should be considered a prospect, he should get less consideration for a vote even if he's on the poll.

 

[Verviticus]

yeah if you had a poll last year and it was "who is our best forward" and keith ballard was on there he wouldn't get consideration from me because i dont identify him as a forward