And top end players getting picked by American teams from our own backyard. Newhook looking really good right now
Prospect Info: 2019 Prospects PART 2
- Thread starter M2Beezy
- Start date
- Status
I'll take the $5 right now thank you
No doubt.
Obviously I meant as a #5 Dman though.
Southern_Canuck
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2004
- 2,444
- 855
Tue Dec 10
NCAA
Maine 1 Yale 3
Thiessen did not play
After his disaster start against Quinnipiac, it looks like it will be tough for him to even get to dress for a game again this season.
S_C
NCAA
Maine 1 Yale 3
Thiessen did not play
After his disaster start against Quinnipiac, it looks like it will be tough for him to even get to dress for a game again this season.
S_C
John Belushi
Registered Boozer
Looks like that much celebrated ranking of #4 prospect pool League-wide was a little optimistic, as a handful of objective fans here had predicted.
Southern_Canuck
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2004
- 2,444
- 855
Wed Dec 11
AHL
Toronto 4 Utica 6
DiPietro 27 saves on 31 shots
Jasek 6 (Bailey, Lind)
Perron 5 (Goldobin, Camper)
Brisebois 3 (Boucher, Rafferty)
Jasek 7 (Goldobin)
Lind 7 (Baertschi, Rafferty) (PP)
Boucher 18 (Baertschi, Sautner) (EN)
ECHL
Kalamazoo 2 Cincinnati 3 (OT)
Kielly 16 saves on 19 shots
S_C
AHL
Toronto 4 Utica 6
DiPietro 27 saves on 31 shots
Jasek 6 (Bailey, Lind)
Perron 5 (Goldobin, Camper)
Brisebois 3 (Boucher, Rafferty)
Jasek 7 (Goldobin)
Lind 7 (Baertschi, Rafferty) (PP)
Boucher 18 (Baertschi, Sautner) (EN)
ECHL
Kalamazoo 2 Cincinnati 3 (OT)
Kielly 16 saves on 19 shots
S_C
Has it been a bad year? A couple prospects down but some better then expected as well. Pronman ranked our 2017 draft as the best of the 31 teams. Quinn Hughes is already our best dman. Next year's ranking will be lower without him but the high ranking this year was justified. Likely out of market pundits our more objective than our local "objective" posters.
Out of market pundits don't follow drafts as closely as fans of teams do as far as I'm concerned.
The prospect pool ranking was completely driven by the elite at the top. Hughes looks fantastic and was a great selection, but him being in the prospect pool at the time of ranking is why it was 4th.
I don't think it ranks middle half with Podkolzin, Dipietro, Madden, Woo, Juolevi and Lind......if that's a top 10 prospect pool the league is in trouble.
Pronman ranked Hunter Shinkaruk like top 5 IIRC and still had him as a top 20 prospect in the league after the draft. He's not a very good authority. Even the TSN list is laughable. Podkolzin (who I'm a bigger fan of than most around here) being given the same rank as successful proven established NHL players was a bit much.
The prospect pool isn't deep, it never was, it was top heavy, and that will be seen as the rankings come out next year.
Top heavy. That's why prospects pool rankings are a pile of crap. Just give me a list of the top 50 or 100 prospects outside the NHL ranked and let me know where the Canucks land.
I think it's pretty likely the Canucks would only have one in the top 50, but might get 3 or 4 more if you went to 100.
https://www.tsn.ca/russian-wingers-top-tsn-s-ranking-of-nhl-affiliated-prospects-1.1241872
They had 3 of the top 50 as of January, all 3 graduated.
The Iron Goalie
Formally 'OEL for Norris'
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 17,128
- 16,511
Pronman: 2019-20 NHL farm system rankings =5th
Prospect Pool Rankings = 4th
2019 Organizational Prospect Rankings Top 10 - Last Word on Hockey = 5th
https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-farm-system-rankings/ =4th
NHL farm system rankings: Best, worst prospect pipelines for 2019-20, from 1 to 31 =8th
Gaudette and Pettersson had already graduated 2018
Hughes and Demko 2019
Prospect Pool Rankings = 4th
2019 Organizational Prospect Rankings Top 10 - Last Word on Hockey = 5th
https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-farm-system-rankings/ =4th
NHL farm system rankings: Best, worst prospect pipelines for 2019-20, from 1 to 31 =8th
Gaudette and Pettersson had already graduated 2018
Hughes and Demko 2019
Pretty sure everyone is aware of where these "pundits" ranked the pool. It was discussed ad nauseum all summer.
It was ranked highly because of the top end talents not the depth.
With Demko and Hughes gone, replaced by Silovs and Podkolzin I don't think it does anything but plummet and potentially with no 1st round pick next summer, I wouldn't be surprised if their ranking is closer to 20 than 10.
It was ranked highly because of the top end talents not the depth.
With Demko and Hughes gone, replaced by Silovs and Podkolzin I don't think it does anything but plummet and potentially with no 1st round pick next summer, I wouldn't be surprised if their ranking is closer to 20 than 10.
The Iron Goalie
Formally 'OEL for Norris'
Still very possible we have a 1st this summer, as there's no guarantee we make the playoffs.
Oh I get that, the whole point I'm making about these lists is that they're driven by one or two players, especially with regards to the Canucks rankings. They don't have a very deep system and now that the elites have risen to the NHL, I don't think it's very high end.
The group of u25 talent is solid though, but that again is driven by 4 or 5 guys....
Compare the Canucks to the Avalanche and see if we still feel great about the future. They've got an elite team NOW, and have a loaded prospect pool and have the most cap space in the NHL.
The Iron Goalie
Formally 'OEL for Norris'
Lemmiwinks
Registered User
So as soon as Hughes graduates, people here look back and scoff at prospect pool rankings from the summer when he was still a prospect? Ok.
604
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2011
- 7,419
- 1,650
Depth in a prospect pool doesn't really mean anything.
One elite player is more valuable than 10 good prospects.
I.e. Petterson > Demko, DiPietro, Lind, Gaudette, etc...all put together.
One elite player is more valuable than 10 good prospects.
I.e. Petterson > Demko, DiPietro, Lind, Gaudette, etc...all put together.
No, people scoffed at the time too. Prospect rankings are fairly meaningless, but folks around here keep point to these lists like they mean anything.
Is the pool deep? I'd say no. That's why I don't think it's a top prospect pool, it was extremely shallow and heavily influenced by the top. Would have just been better to say the Canucks have one of the top 10 prospects in the league, because that was the driver of the ranking.
I think the overall pool has been weak throughout with an extremely high end, with Hughes last year, and Pettersson preceding that.
Do you think they still have a top 5 pool now that Hughes has graduated.....if you take every graduated player of the other teams lists, are the Canucks still near the top? I'd say they're probably average to slightly below.
Pretty much, but then it shouldn't be a prospect pool ranking. I especially found Pronman's rankings strange as he called a "farm system" ranking and the Comets had been pretty poor for like 3-4 years prior to his ranking.
Prospect pool rankings don't mean anything, but generally teams that have been as bad as the canucks have been for 5 of the past 6 years, have a lot more than 1 or 2 elite pieces and a bunch of hopes and prayers.
Melvin
21/12/05
Southern_Canuck
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2004
- 2,444
- 855
Lemmiwinks
Registered User
In answer to your question, no I certainly don’t think the Canucks are still near the top, I’d say they rank in the bottom half of the league without Hughes. I also agree that prospect pool rankings are pretty meaningless.
You would have to prove generally to have a point. I have no love of any one person's analysis but I will more likely listen to someone who has looked at all teams, provided their work and ranked them, compared to one looking at one team's pool and saying generally.
Nope. Point is still there. You can dispute the point but it’s right there.
- Status
