2013-14 Mid-Season Prospect Poll: #4

[BananaSquad]

There's no "easily better" out of the next 4 or so guys

Easily better then Armia. IMO Armia ceiling is Stafford. I got Compher, McCabe, Baptiste and Ullmark ahead of Armia.

 

[Moskau]

He is small, slow and stiff. It's a combo that rarely leads to good pros. I see him as an AHL/NHL tweener that will probably spend his career bouncing around like Tim Kennedy.

I think you're insane if you believe that. Tim Kennedy couldn't play defense if his life depended on it. Your whole infatuation with skill even if it doesn't translate to the NHL boggles my mind. I have to wonder how much playoff Hockey you watch.

Furthermore your analysis of Armia is way off. I'm actually a fan of his skillset but he did not have a great year last year. He showed almost no growth in his game the same way he showed no growth in his game the year before that. You can buy into the hype that he back checked more but it's ********. If you want to see Europeans that actually have shown growth in his game you need to watch Tampa Bay and Detroit prospects. The guy has regressed every year since he was drafted. This organization's ability to draft Europeans that actually take the next step in their game has been a big problem for over a decade. Like... a really big problem. If you hate the way Cody Hodgson plays you are going to hate Armia because Armia makes Hodgson look like Girgensons in the effort department.

 

[stokes84]

I think you're insane if you believe that. Tim Kennedy couldn't play defense if his life depended on it. Your whole infatuation with skill even if it doesn't translate to the NHL boggles my mind. I have to wonder how much playoff Hockey you watch.

Furthermore your analysis of Armia is way off. I'm actually a fan of his skillset but he did not have a great year last year. He showed almost no growth in his game the same way he showed no growth in his game the year before that. You can buy into the hype that he back checked more but it's ********. If you want to see Europeans that actually have shown growth in his game you need to watch Tampa Bay and Detroit prospects. The guy has regressed every year since he was drafted. This organization's ability to draft Europeans that actually take the next step in their game has been a big problem for over a decade. Like... a really big problem. If you hate the way Cody Hodgson plays you are going to hate Armia because Armia makes Hodgson look like Girgensons in the effort department.

Armia was one the top players at the WJC and played on the top line for a team that won the league title. If you want to downplay that, go right ahead. Having the tools is very important.

 

[Sabre the Win]

Armia was one the top players at the WJC and played on the top line for a team that won the league title. If you want to downplay that, go right ahead. Having the tools is very important.

You hate Hodgson but when he played at the WJC he was the top scorer of the entire tournament for team Canada with 16 points on the same team as Tavares and rocking the C and you hate Hodgson so I don't see how that point constitutes for anything.

 

[Aapo]

Armia was one the top players at the WJC and played on the top line for a team that won the league title. If you want to downplay that, go right ahead. Having the tools is very important.

I agree that's impressive. By the way, you do know that Larsson captained team Sweden to the WJC gold the year before?

 

[OcAirlines]

Compher, add Bailey for tactical reasons (I'd actually prefer Lieuwen, Florentino or Malone)

 

[stokes84]

I agree that's impressive. By the way, you do know that Larsson captained team Sweden to the WJC gold the year before?

Yes, I am aware.

 

[stokes84]

You hate Hodgson but when he played at the WJC he was the top scorer of the entire tournament for team Canada with 16 points on the same team as Tavares and rocking the C and you hate Hodgson so I don't see how that point constitutes for anything.

Hodgson still would have been very high on any prospect list. He has tools.

 

[dotcommunism]

Armia was one the top players at the WJC and played on the top line for a team that won the league title. If you want to downplay that, go right ahead. Having the tools is very important.

He scored 12 points in 6 games, but saying that he was one of the top players at the tournament shows that you're lacking some serious context. 7 of those 12 points came in Finland's 2 relegation round games against Germany and Slovakia. Another 2 points came during group play against Latvia. So Armia scored 9/12 of his points in 3/6 of his games against teams that ended up in the relegation group. So only 3 of his points came in the 3 games against teams that weren't completely awful. That's a lot less impressive than just saying "12 points in 6 games"

 

[Jame]

He had a great season last year and this year he's been playing through injuries while adjusting to the NA game and lifestyle. It's a lot to adjust to so he gets the benefit of the doubt. Larsson has a very limited ceiling. If Larsson wins, I'll want to have the same sort of temper tantrum you are having. I don't know if he has a real NHL future.

What a joke...

11-12 Larsson Last year in SEL 19 yrs old = 0.69 Pts per game
12-13 Larsson 1st year in NA and AHL 20 yrs old = 0.60 pts per game

12-13 Armia Last year in SM Liiga 19 yrs old = 0.68 Pts per game
13-14 Armia First year in NA and AHL = 20 yrs old 0.41Pts per game

note: In his 2nd year in NA, Larsson is at 0.92 pts per game

 

[Jame]

There was a time when our prospect pool was so barren that any previous "high" picks... would hang around on "potential" for longer than necessary (Zagrapan, Persson, Adam, etc).

People don't seem to recognize how deep our pool of talent is... and guys like Armia who have one really good skill, but a completely empty tool box... they don't have to remain at the top on potential alone.

I've been playing around with a ranking system... and Armia is dropping, along with Grigs...

It's ok to have some mid 1st rounders in the 5-10 range... you don't have to force them into the top 5 on talent alone...

 

[Zman5778]

He had a great season last year and this year he's been playing through injuries while adjusting to the NA game and lifestyle. It's a lot to adjust to so he gets the benefit of the doubt. Larsson has a very limited ceiling. If Larsson wins, I'll want to have the same sort of temper tantrum you are having. I don't know if he has a real NHL future.

While I think Larsson most certainly has an NHL future, I do question his offensive capabilities in the NHL. At best, I'm hoping he turns into a Hecht-type glue guy with similar offensive capabilities. While I'm fairly certain he's going to be at least a solid 3rd liner (hopefully 3rd line C), I can't picture him being a 2nd line C unless due to injury. That's why he's behind Armia in my personal rankings (and Compher...and McCabe....)

Would someone care to explain to me why Armia is being credited so high? Just because he was a first round years ago doesn't mean anything. We have had better first rounders since then and just because your first round doesn't make you good (ie. Luke Adam) for example.

1.) Luke Adam was a 2nd rounder

2.) Armia still has a sky-high potential. Like 1st-line wing type potential. Semin-type potential. SICK release, hard shot. He's got the size and occasionally uses it. I'm just hoping at this point that this year is just an adjustment/injury year and he bounces back next year.

I can't believe people are still high on Grigorenko, that train derailed for me, I know he's young but he hasn't even shown a spark of super stardom in his 50 some games

Then you haven't watched many of his games. In the vast majority, he's made one or two plays that just scream out loud how much talent he has. It's really some poor luck that he doesn't have more points (more specifically, assists....I can distinctly remember Stafford chunking about 3 gimmes and Ott 1 or 2).

 

[Zman5778]

People don't seem to recognize how deep our pool of talent is... and guys like Armia who have one really good skill, but a completely empty tool box... they don't have to remain at the top on potential alone.

I think you're being a bit harsh and exaggerative on Armia's tool box. This is the kid's first real lengthy exposure away from home and he's shown flashes. Am I concerned? Yeah, a bit.

Am I ready to say he has "a completely empty toolbox". Not even close....not after what he showed in last year's playoffs.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

Then you haven't watched many of his games. In the vast majority, he's made one or two plays that just scream out loud how much talent he has. It's really some poor luck that he doesn't have more points (more specifically, assists....I can distinctly remember Stafford chunking about 3 gimmes and Ott 1 or 2).

It's more than luck though. There are definite deficiencies in his game that he needs to improve on.

But that is also entirely normal for a kid his age (which again is the key point. Grigorenko at 20 is still miles ahead of most guys his age). I think it's safe to say he's not the phenom some may have thought he would be when he was ranked top 2 the season before the draft. But he's still a damn good prospect...just not the "OMG ELITE!" prospect he was two years ago. Would still be right near the top on most teams prospect charts.

 

[enthusiast]

let's talk about how larsson's offensive game has thus far translated to nhl play


it should be a short conversation

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

I think it's kind of silly to say potential shouldn't be a major factor in ranking prospects. Anybody who is voting for Larsson here is ALSO taking his potential into account, because he's not good enough to be an NHL player right now on a terrible team. When he's had the shot, he hasn't been great. Armia hasn't even gotten a shot yet. I think both can still be really good players eventually.

So if potential is a factor, it's perfectly reasonable to rate a guy capable of being a first line scoring winger higher than a guy capable of being a 50-60 pt center who is responsible defensively. We need both... of course. But one is objectively more valuable than the other (salary, trade value, etc).

There is always a tendency when evaluating something that takes a long time to unfold to draw conclusions based on insufficient data. I am concerned about Armia's development because of his recent stagnation, but my opinions are durable enough to not be swayed when the trendline stops heading upwards for a second. Sometimes the adversity of a setback is exactly what helps a player mature and get to a higher level of play.

I don't say any of this to undercut anybody elses's vote, but to defend my own. Again, valid arguments could be made for several of these guys, Larsson included.

 

[Jame]

I think you're being a bit harsh and exaggerative on Armia's tool box. This is the kid's first real lengthy exposure away from home and he's shown flashes. Am I concerned? Yeah, a bit.

Am I ready to say he has "a completely empty toolbox". Not even close....not after what he showed in last year's playoffs.

I think that's fair...

 

[Sabre the Win]

let's talk about how larsson's offensive game has thus far translated to nhl play


it should be a short conversation

How could you use that as a basis to anything this poll represents considering all these kids have barely had any NHL time to none. This statement just goes to prove this list is voted by favourites rather than prospects showing and proving regardless what league they are playing in.

 

[enthusiast]

How could you use that as a basis to anything this poll represents considering all these kids have barely had any NHL time to none. This statement just goes to prove this list is voted by favourites rather than prospects showing and proving regardless what league they are playing in.

It was directed as a criticism of the ppg argument re armia/larsson

this isn't about what prospects have proven thus far because otherwise there's no room whatsoever to include potential. At that point it's just a year-end progress report.

 

[Sabre the Win]

It was directed as a criticism of the ppg argument re armia/larsson

this isn't about what prospects have proven thus far because otherwise there's no room whatsoever to include potential. At that point it's just a year-end progress report.

Which it should be since this poll will come up again at the end of the year and so on and so on. We should be looking at the list and seeing progression rather than keeping this list as potential which is not a very accurate way to portray the rankings of your prospects but to each their own.

 

[Zman5778]

I think that's fair...

What's fair?

What I said or to already pass judgement on the kid having an "empty toolbox"?

 

[Jame]

I think it's kind of silly to say potential shouldn't be a major factor in ranking prospects. Anybody who is voting for Larsson here is ALSO taking his potential into account, because he's not good enough to be an NHL player right now on a terrible team. When he's had the shot, he hasn't been great. Armia hasn't even gotten a shot yet. I think both can still be really good players eventually.

So if potential is a factor, it's perfectly reasonable to rate a guy capable of being a first line scoring winger higher than a guy capable of being a 50-60 pt center who is responsible defensively. We need both... of course. But one is objectively more valuable than the other (salary, trade value, etc).

There is always a tendency when evaluating something that takes a long time to unfold to draw conclusions based on insufficient data. I am concerned about Armia's development because of his recent stagnation, but my opinions are durable enough to not be swayed when the trendline stops heading upwards for a second. Sometimes the adversity of a setback is exactly what helps a player mature and get to a higher level of play.

I don't say any of this to undercut anybody elses's vote, but to defend my own. Again, valid arguments could be made for several of these guys, Larsson included.

i dont choose when to rely solely on potential and ignore development flaws/dips

and i dont think 3 seasons of post draft hockey is "insufficient data" with regards to allowing those seasons to impact other areas of "prospect rankings"... i.e. Development, Projection/Probability.

 

[enthusiast]

Which it should be since this poll will come up again at the end of the year and so on and so on. We should be looking at the list and seeing progression rather than keeping this list as potential which is not a very accurate way to portray the rankings of your prospects but to each their own.

So to be clear you'd have Baptiste over Grigorenko?

Everyone, or at least most here, knows how each player's been progressing. The value to the franchise is not what they currently are but what they will be.

 

[Jame]

What's fair?

What I said or to already pass judgement on the kid having an "empty toolbox"?

Your criticism of my exaggeration was fair.

 

[Zman5778]

Your criticism of my exaggeration was fair.

You could very, very well be right. You do have a history of that around here.