Prospect Info: 2020-2021 Senators Prospect Watch

[FormentonTheFuture]

I just can’t believe the arrogance of some of these “internet scouts.” I mean seriously, a guy calling himself Tony Ferrari has the nerve to write an article suggesting that he knows better than our entire organization does on which players will end up better nhlers. Like show some humility and understand the fact that the people making these picks have spent their entire careers working in professional hockey and maybe, just maybe, know a little bit more about scouting than you do, Tony Ferrari.

I mean that’s probably his name...

 

[DrEasy]

I just can’t believe the arrogance of some of these “internet scouts.” I mean seriously, a guy calling himself Tony Ferrari has the nerve to write an article suggesting that he knows better than our entire organization does on which players will end up better nhlers. Like show some humility and understand the fact that the people making these picks have spent their entire careers working in professional hockey and maybe, just maybe, know a little bit more about scouting than you do, Tony Ferrari.

Hey if my name was Ferrari I'd be arrogant too.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

I mean, Dobber guys are bashing the Sens draft, that's not surprising looking at their draft rankings.

I think their rankings were awful, so that basically sums up my feeling on their evaluation.

They had Stutzle 7 (-4), Sanderson 8 (-3), and Grieg 54 (-26). Of course they aren't going to like the Sens draft.

Again, that speaks more to the terrible ranking they had in place than it does an actual evaluation of the draft.

Also not sure why he's saying we played it safe with Grieg instead of taking Perrault, seeing he was off the board the pick before Grieg...As well as Sokolov hasn't been 240 pounds since March, he's 215ish. Strange to have his weight as a negative when it's 25 pounds off.

That truly was a very bad read

This part really gets me

"The same thing will be said in the future that so many Senators fans and draft analysts are saying now, why didn’t they just take the best player available? "

Best player available in the eyes of Tony Ferrari, who cares about the eyes of Trent Mann and the Sens.

Plus the wild inconsistencies. Like basically ripping "safe picks" because they were two-way players in Sanderson and Greig, then also ripping Jarventie for his bad play away from the puck and lack of defensive play (which isn't exactly accurate but whatever). So the Sens pick two -way players and it's too safe but when they pick a supposedly all offense player in Jarventie, it's all about well he needs to work on his defensive game.

Just show maybe a shred of consistency and maybe a bit of impartiality. But no.

And then proposing that they should have picked Raymond, Holtz and Bourque in the first round? I mean I like all those players but it's far from even close to more BPA then what the Sens actually did (according to most lists).

 

[Samsquanch]

Calling Sanderson a safe pick is just blatantly incorrect. I’m not reading the rest

The Sens drafted Logan Brown (moved up for that matter). The opposite kind of player in this perceived myth that they dont value talent.

Jarventie is another recent example. Pinto showed that he can score and that hes was not a safe pick at all, and it showed once again why their scouts get paid, and why we do not.

There is a clear pattern the Sens tend to follow - and thats late rising guys (with good character) that are hopefully just scratching the surface. The draft year numbers are not as paramount in the evaluation as they are to most of us.

And thats the true art in scouting these kids, which is predicting where they will be in 3-5yrs from now. Not what they are today.

 

[Xspyrit]

Hey if my name was Ferrari I'd be arrogant too.

Can't wait to get Porsche Taycan latest review

 

[Xspyrit]

And then proposing that they should have picked Raymond, Holtz and Bourque in the first round? I mean I like all those players but it's far from even close to more BPA then what the Sens actually did (according to most lists).

And in the list that matters the most (because it actually surveys NHL scouts that work for real NHL teams)

Stuetzle 2nd
Sanderson 8th
Greig 24th

Raymond 6th
Holtz 9th
Bourque 26th

Guys like Ferrari should say "Personally, I would have prefered" instead of saying stuff like "they passed on" or "the concensus", would make them much more credible.

I actually think "safe pick" is a myth. Safe basically just means the player is likely to be a NHL player. In the end, no one really knows how good or bad the player will become. People saw Colin White as a "safe pick" but his rookie season was actually very promising to something more. 47 pts pace at 21-22 y/o is quite good. If he followed up on that to become a 2-way 50-60 pts center (or like Turris), how "safe" would that pick be at 21st OA?

I don't have other examples of who was viewed as a "safe pick" (because I don't care that much) but I'm sure there are better ones. How was Bergeron seen pre-draft? He was taken 45th OA. I am screening an article that says the Bruins were tempted to take him 21st OA. Couldn't find anything about his NHL projection pre-draft. He was a good player in the Q but nothing to suggest an attempt to swing it out of the park, which is why he was passed by many teams. Bruins saw it differently.

There is a clear pattern the Sens tend to follow - and thats late rising guys (with good character) that are hopefully just scratching the surface. The draft year numbers are not as paramount in the evaluation as they are to most of us.

And thats the true art in scouting these kids, which is predicting where they will be in 3-5yrs from now. Not what they are today.

Exactly what I have been saying a lot recently. It's not about what they have done yesterday but what they project to do tomorrow. They would have never picked Formenton 47th OA if they cared that much about junior stats. And is there any Sens fan who is not happy that they did? Anyone who is "mad" that they passed on "x, y or z" to select Formenton? Even if Comtois and Studnicka will also good players not picked long after

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I just can’t believe the arrogance of some of these “internet scouts.” I mean seriously, a guy calling himself Tony Ferrari has the nerve to write an article suggesting that he knows better than our entire organization does on which players will end up better nhlers. Like show some humility and understand the fact that the people making these picks have spent their entire careers working in professional hockey and maybe, just maybe, know a little bit more about scouting than you do, Tony Ferrari.

So why even have a opinion I totally feel you

 

[Icelevel]

I mean, Dobber guys are bashing the Sens draft, that's not surprising looking at their draft rankings.

I think their rankings were awful, so that basically sums up my feeling on their evaluation.

They had Stutzle 7 (-4), Sanderson 8 (-3), and Grieg 54 (-26). Of course they aren't going to like the Sens draft.

Again, that speaks more to the terrible ranking they had in place than it does an actual evaluation of the draft.

Also not sure why he's saying we played it safe with Grieg instead of taking Perrault, seeing he was off the board the pick before Grieg...As well as Sokolov hasn't been 240 pounds since March, he's 215ish. Strange to have his weight as a negative when it's 25 pounds off.

That truly was a very bad read

This part really gets me

"The same thing will be said in the future that so many Senators fans and draft analysts are saying now, why didn’t they just take the best player available? "

Best player available in the eyes of Tony Ferrari, who cares about the eyes of Trent Mann and the Sens.

I mean, anyone criticizing the players we picked at those spots is pretty frickin stupid. It’s that simple.
Stuetzle is not far off from lafreniere and Sanderson could easily end up the best D from the draft. Greig could easily end up a kickass top 9 steal. And then Jarventie is icing.

It was an awesome draft. Home run. Grand slam.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

So why even have a opinion I totally feel you

Have an opinion, sure, of course. But what has Tony Ferrari done to have an opinion on this type of thing that should really be valued? So many of these guys show that they are able to determine who is a "nasty" player, very few show an ability to project what makes an NHLer. Most just copy other lists, add a bit of variance, and then throw a few guys up high. If you've watched thousands of hours of prospects, throwing a guy projected in the 2nd round in the top 20 isn't exactly a bold take. To put it in hip hop terms, most of these guys seem like they're just frontin'.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Poor lil branny!

 

[Sensators]

Poor lil branny!

Good thing he missed that was vicious.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

This is pathetic. You guys want free content but get upset when the people making it don't agree with your already cemented opinions on players you've probably not even seen play.

The Sens not doing great at the draft table for the past 10 years is obviously a tough pill to swallow for most here.

 

[BondraTime]

This is pathetic. You guys want free content but get upset when the people making it don't agree with your already cemented opinions on players you've probably not even seen play.

The Sens not doing great at the draft table for the past 10 years is obviously a tough pill to swallow for most here.

No, when the content is not good and adds little reasoning and sensibility, it gets called out. Would be the same if it was praising the draft through faulty logic, which happens as well. This one leans to the former.

If a good argument is made and good points brought up that differentiate with personal opinions, that’s perfect and is worth discussing.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Have an opinion, sure, of course. But what has Tony Ferrari done to have an opinion on this type of thing that should really be valued? So many of these guys show that they are able to determine who is a "nasty" player, very few show an ability to project what makes an NHLer. Most just copy other lists, add a bit of variance, and then throw a few guys up high. If you've watched thousands of hours of prospects, throwing a guy projected in the 2nd round in the top 20 isn't exactly a bold take. To put it in hip hop terms, most of these guys seem like they're just frontin'.

That should be valued? Who on earth is telling you to value it lmao.
For f*** sakes guys lmfao. These guys watch hockey they write up their thoughts they put it online. That’s it. Who said they need bold takes.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

No, when the content is not good and adds little reasoning and sensibility, it gets called out. Would be the same if it was praising the draft through faulty logic, which happens as well. This one leans to the former.

If a good argument is made and good points brought up that differentiate with personal opinions, that’s perfect and is worth discussing.

I don’t see “I don’t think this player is as good as the sens do”. Or “I like player x more than the sens did” is faulty logic. It’s an opinion on a completely subjective topic. An opinion that will be proven right or wrong in due time.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

This is pathetic. You guys want free content but get upset when the people making it don't agree with your already cemented opinions on players you've probably not even seen play.

The Sens not doing great at the draft table for the past 10 years is obviously a tough pill to swallow for most here.

I look at it as just another perspective on a player I’ve seen very little of, from people that have seen much more of.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

This is pathetic. You guys want free content but get upset when the people making it don't agree with your already cemented opinions on players you've probably not even seen play.

The Sens not doing great at the draft table for the past 10 years is obviously a tough pill to swallow for most here.

If there was someone who’s opinion I respected beforehand being critical, I’d respect that opinion. And there are people I respect as evaluators and less so as projectors (scouching being the perfect example of someone who I’m a big fan of in terms of evaluating the here and now vs projection).

Sens will obviously have some missed and had some picks I wouldn’t have made. You can certainly critique those early picks, too, but if you do so you need to have strong reasoning to back it up. I haven’t seen much of that, especially from Ferrari.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

That should be valued? Who on earth is telling you to value it lmao.
For f*** sakes guys lmfao. These guys watch hockey they write up their thoughts they put it online. That’s it. Who said they need bold takes.

And we’re discussing it! Evaluating it! That’s it’s purpose. That’s all. I’m not saying you shouldn’t post or read Tony Ferrari or whoever.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

And we’re discussing it! Evaluating it! That’s it’s purpose. That’s all. I’m not saying you shouldn’t post or read Tony Ferrari or whoever.

Sure.
But the “who’s he to say x y z “ sentiment is f***ing stupid lol. I mean. We’re all at different levels of hockey viewing.if that’s the game, A good question is..who are some here, to question this Tony Ferraris opinions?

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Sure.
But the “who’s he to say x y z “ sentiment is f***ing stupid lol. I mean. We’re all at different levels of hockey viewing.if that’s the game, A good question is..who are some here, to question this Tony Ferraris opinions?

Fair enough, and I didnt say that to imply his opinion is dirt. Unless he is a total grifter, I'm sure he has watched more of these guys than almost all of us discussing this. But that doesn't really say much in terms of ability to evaluate to the scope that is necessary here. These guys have the need to familiarize themselves with a pool of prospects that no single NHL scout would attempt to consolidate into a personal ranking - I think that leads to a huge increase in personal bias and influence by the biases of ones peers, and I think thats important to keep in mind with these lists.

The only guy I've seen who has really stepped out of convention is Draft Dynasty and, at the same time, he's the least critical of teams straying from his personal list. He had Raymond 12th, but he could still justify Detroit taking Raymond 4th. He had Byfield 6th, but he still liked LA taking him 2nd.

I'll be honest, though, I take any individual evaluating a teams draft with a huge grain of salt, and I think we all should, positive or negative. That's all I was trying to get across. Ferrari's justifications just happened to be particularly weak. If he was submitting that to a professor, they'd be circling every paragraph and annotating it with "weak justification".

 

[BondraTime]

I don’t see “I don’t think this player is as good as the sens do”. Or “I like player x more than the sens did” is faulty logic. It’s an opinion on a completely subjective topic. An opinion that will be proven right or wrong in due time.

The faulty logic is “the Sens could have walked away from the draft with Raymond, Holtz and Bourque at 3, 5 and 28, but instead they will regret their draft in 5 years” (Funnily enough, all are rated lower than the guy the Sens took in their place on McKenzies rankings)

Yes, we know the dobber staffs rankings. That’s not what I’m disagreeing with (though they were among the worst from the services). I’m disagreeing with the rationale behind the evaluations and reasoning.

And the other that’s being critiqued. The Sens were rated 7th for prospect pools just before the draft, and somehow fall 7 spots to 14th. How does that make sense? A team that added the 3rd and 5th overall pick, along with another 1st rounder and 3 2nd round picks and fell 7 spots after a draft. If anyone could give a sensible reasoning or offer an explanation as to how or why, I’ll concede.

 

[Xspyrit]

Like I said in last page, guys like Ferrari should say "Personally, I would have prefered" instead of saying stuff like "they passed on" or "the concensus", would make them much more credible.

Makes them look like teenagers who still don't understand the difference between opinion and fact.

You're writing an article, you have to choose your words carefully. Writing basic

 

[Burrowsaurus]

The faulty logic is “the Sens could have walked away from the draft with Raymond, Holtz and Bourque at 3, 5 and 28, but instead they will regret their draft in 5 years” (Funnily enough, all are rated lower than the guy the Sens took in their place on McKenzies rankings)

Yes, we know the dobber staffs rankings. That’s not what I’m disagreeing with (though they were among the worst from the services). I’m disagreeing with the rationale behind the evaluations and reasoning.

And the other that’s being critiqued. The Sens were rated 7th for prospect pools just before the draft, and somehow fall 7 spots to 14th. How does that make sense? A team that added the 3rd and 5th overall pick, along with another 1st rounder and 3 2nd round picks and fell 7 spots after a draft. If anyone could give a sensible reasoning or offer an explanation as to how or why, I’ll concede.

Well the best explanation will show through when these players are in the nhl.
I disagree with the sens having the 14th best pool as well.

that raymond Holtz comment I BELIEVE was a joke. They’ve been higher on rossi than holts all year I THINK. He’s mused a few times about having the “terror twins” or whatever the f*** they call them.

 

[playasRus]

Like I said in last page, guys like Ferrari should say "Personally, I would have prefered" instead of saying stuff like "they passed on" or "the concensus", would make them much more credible.

Makes them look like teenagers who still don't understand the difference between opinion and fact.

You're writing an article, you have to choose your words carefully. Writing basic

The leafs fans love to read it. The sens fans hate it enough to read it, overanalyze their wording, and discuss it at length over several pages on a forum, generating even more clicks from the uproar.

Why does random John have to tailor his wording to oversensitive sports fans. Don't agree? Stop reading and just read something that resonates better with you. This is like going into am antivaccine forum and being mad that people disagree and/or are unreasonable. The internet is an echo chamber of opinions.

 

[dumbdick]

I just can’t believe the arrogance of some of these “internet scouts.” I mean seriously, a guy calling himself Tony Ferrari has the nerve to write an article suggesting that he knows better than our entire organization does on which players will end up better nhlers. Like show some humility and understand the fact that the people making these picks have spent their entire careers working in professional hockey and maybe, just maybe, know a little bit more about scouting than you do, Tony Ferrari.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I wouldn't even be surprised if that's not his real name.