Prospect Info: 2023-24 Prospect Thread

[xECK29x]

This season I'll just update the first post each Monday instead of a copy/paste of a table each time.

+ = on IR or just hurt
# = season complete

PLAYER	POS	ACQUIRED	HFB RANK	TEAM	GP	G	A	PTS	PIM	+/-
William Dufour	RW	2020 round 5 #152	1	Bridgeport Islanders	52	15	10	25	29	-12
Samuel Bolduc	D	2019 round 2 #57	2	New York Islanders	33	1	2	3	6	-5
				Bridgeport Islanders	5	1	0	1	2	2
Matthew Maggio	RW	2022 round 5 #142	3	Bridgeport Islanders	58	16	9	25	20	-2
Simon Holmstrom	RW/LW	2019 round 1 #23	4	New York Islanders	72	14	9	23	14	-1
Danny Nelson #	C	2023 round 2 #49	5	Univ. of Notre Dame	30	9	14	23	32	5
				USA U20	7	1	1	2	0	4
Ruslan Iskhakov	C/LW	2018 round 2 #43	6	Bridgeport Islanders	67	17	31	48	30	-16
Tyce Thompson	RW	Trade		Utica Comets	15	0	5	5	12	4
				Bridgeport Islanders	47	3	10	13	54	-19
Calle Odelius	D	2022 round 2 #65	8	Djugardens IF	10	0	4	4	2	0
				Djugardens IF (Playoffs)	2	0	1	1	2	0
				Sweden U20	8	0	1	1	8	-
Robin Salo	D	2017 round 2 #46	9	Bridgeport Islanders	64	5	18	23	22	-12
Isaiah George	D	2022 round 4 #98	10	London Knights	68	6	24	30	54	26
				London (Playoffs)	4	1	2	3	0	5
Alex Jefferies	LW	2020 round 4 #121	11	Merrimack College	22	13	10	23	19	1
				Bridgeport Islanders	8	3	1	4	0	-1
Eetu Liukas	LW	2021 round 5 #157	12	Bridgeport Islanders	45	3	4	7	34	-13
Quinn Finley #	LW	2022 round 3 #78	13	Univ. of Wisconsin	35	9	6	15	16	4
				USA U20	7	1	1	2	0	2
Jesse Nurmi #	LW	2023 round 4 #113	14	KooKoo	19	0	2	2	2	-7
				KooKoo U20	6	4	4	8	0	-2
				Finland U20	6	0	2	2	0	-
Aleksi Malinen #	D	2021 round 6 #189	15T	JYP	15	0	2	2	0	-3
Zach Schulz #	D	2023 round 6 #177	HM1	Univ. of Wisconsin	33	2	4	6	6	4
Cameron Berg #	C	2021 round 4 #125	HM2	Univ. of North Dakota	40	20	17	37	8	7
Daylan Kuefler	LW	2022 round 6 #174	HM3	Worcester Railers	17	5	3	8	9	-4
				Bridgeport Islanders	19	3	3	6	37	-1
Aidan Fulp	D	UFA		Bridgeport Islanders	47	1	4	5	14	-19
Justin Gill	C	2023 round 5 #145		Baie-Comeau Drakkar	65	40	58	98	66	57
				Baie-Comeau (Playoffs)	4	3	4	7	2	4
Dennis Good Bogg #	D	2023 round 7 #209		AIK J20	18	1	4	5	45	-5
				AIK	10	0	1	1	0	1
				Vallentuna Hockey	7	0	1	1	10	-1
				Brodernas/Vasby	4	0	0	0	2	-2
				Östersunds IK	8	0	1	1	6	-4
				Östersunds IK (Playoffs)	1	0	0	0	0	0
Alexander Ljungkrantz #	LW/RW	2020 round 3 #90		Almtuna IS	44	20	12	32	8	-7
				Farjestad BK	8	0	0	0	0	-1
Travis Mitchell	D	UFA		Bridgeport Islanders	34	1	3	4	36	-6
Reece Newkirk	C	2019 round 5 #147		Bridgeport Islanders	15	1	2	3	2	1
				Worcester Railers	10	5	4	9	2	4
Matias Rajaniemi	D	2020 round 6 #183		SaiPa	53	0	8	8	18	-24
				Bridgeport Islanders	0	0	0	0	0	0
GOALIES					GP	GAA	SV%	SO	W-L-T
Tristan Lennox	G	2021 round 3 #93	15T	Worcester Railers	13	2.94	.909	0	5-6-1
Jakub Skarek	G	2018 round 3 #72		Bridgeport Islanders	34	3.15	.890	0	7-21-5
Henrik Tikkanen	G	2020 round 7 #214	Currently UFA	Bridgeport Islanders	16	2.17	.927	0	7-5-2
				Worcester Railers	18	3.25	.890	0	10-6-1

Click to read more...

 

[Glory Days]

This will be unpopular, but you don't have to have a strong prospect system. People love 'em and there's an appeal to having shiny toys in the cupboard to get excited about.

But if you've got your 2-3 top guns and you're stud Dman and a goalie you think you can win with at the NHL level, then the rest of the job is adding pieces bit by bit at the pro level.

The big advantage of having any prospects for the Isles right now would be in having trading pieces.

But draft picks are trading pieces too, and we know that Lou sees them as such.

The team in no way is reliant on good young talent from within. It helps to have depth in case of injuries, but if an upgrade is desired, it'll be acquired elsewhere.

This said, the Isles clearly look for late round gems every summer in their average of 4.5 picks per draft, like every team should. But it's clearly open as to whether any of those guys are being seen as future Islanders.

Another thing is that plenty of other teams pick and pick and pick, but do so knowing they won't be able to sign half of these players down the line. Sure, they too can use them as trade currency, but ultimately, almost all of them have to let guys walk because they just don't have the contract space. So, almost every draft is conducted knowing that plenty of those guys are gonna be first time free agents within 3 years.

Not like the Isles are out there constantly adding such players. But the option is there.

Great post, there are many ways to build a team. No one should care how the team was built as long as the results are there.

 

[The Real JT]

This will be unpopular, but you don't have to have a strong prospect system. People love 'em and there's an appeal to having shiny toys in the cupboard to get excited about.

But if you've got your 2-3 top guns and you're stud Dman and a goalie you think you can win with at the NHL level, then the rest of the job is adding pieces bit by bit at the pro level.

The big advantage of having any prospects for the Isles right now would be in having trading pieces.

But draft picks are trading pieces too, and we know that Lou sees them as such.

The team in no way is reliant on good young talent from within. It helps to have depth in case of injuries, but if an upgrade is desired, it'll be acquired elsewhere.

This said, the Isles clearly look for late round gems every summer in their average of 4.5 picks per draft, like every team should. But it's clearly open as to whether any of those guys are being seen as future Islanders.

Another thing is that plenty of other teams pick and pick and pick, but do so knowing they won't be able to sign half of these players down the line. Sure, they too can use them as trade currency, but ultimately, almost all of them have to let guys walk because they just don't have the contract space. So, almost every draft is conducted knowing that plenty of those guys are gonna be first time free agents within 3 years.

Not like the Isles are out there constantly adding such players. But the option is there.

It’s hard to dispute your take on the Isles strategy though I think the strategy itself has limitations for this particular squad.

Sure you can have a few high-performing players in key spots which we do but of course you’re going to pay for that salary wise. You can add in a few players, paid mid level salaries that might contribute though in the Isles case, these players are now towards the tail end of their careers.

The missing piece here is the need to have young contributing players on bargain contracts. You don’t need a lot of them and I’m certainly not talking about rookies in their first year.

The only one on the current team that fits that description is Holmstrom and he looks like a bottom six player which is helpful but doesn’t move the needle too much. Dobson and Romanoff are relative bargains but before we blink our eyes they’re both going to be getting a sizable bump in their yearly salaries.

Bottom line: We need at least a handful of young players who contribute without taxing the salary cap. Based on the Isles current NHL and prospect rosters, that’s going to be hard to do in the next few years without a major unexpected upside prospect performance or two.

 

[Glory Days]

It’s hard to dispute your take on the Isles strategy though I think the strategy itself has limitations for this particular squad.

Sure you can have a few high-performing players in key spots which we do but of course you’re going to pay for that salary wise. You can add in a few players, paid mid level salaries that might contribute though in the Isles case, these players are now towards the tail end of their careers.

The missing piece here is the need to have young contributing players on bargain contracts. You don’t need a lot of them and I’m certainly not talking about rookies in their first year.

The only one on the current team that fits that description is Holmstrom and he looks like a bottom six player which is helpful but doesn’t move the needle too much. Dobson and Romanoff are relative bargains but before we blink our eyes they’re both going to be getting a sizable bump in their yearly salaries.

Bottom line: We need at least a handful of young players who contribute without taxing the salary cap. Based on the Isles current NHL and prospect rosters, that’s going to be hard to do in the next few years without a major unexpected upside prospect performance or two.

I think the bottom line is the Isles will need players on team friendly contracts. Whether that is young players drafted, college free agents, European free agents or older NHL players on 1 or 2 year deals I don’t care.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

It’s hard to dispute your take on the Isles strategy though I think the strategy itself has limitations for this particular squad.

Sure you can have a few high-performing players in key spots which we do but of course you’re going to pay for that salary wise. You can add in a few players, paid mid level salaries that might contribute though in the Isles case, these players are now towards the tail end of their careers.

The missing piece here is the need to have young contributing players on bargain contracts. You don’t need a lot of them and I’m certainly not talking about rookies in their first year.

The only one on the current team that fits that description is Holmstrom and he looks like a bottom six player which is helpful but doesn’t move the needle too much. Dobson and Romanoff are relative bargains but before we blink our eyes they’re both going to be getting a sizable bump in their yearly salaries.

Bottom line: We need at least a handful of young players who contribute without taxing the salary cap. Based on the Isles current NHL and prospect rosters, that’s going to be hard to do in the next few years without a major unexpected upside prospect performance or two.

It is true that all of what I wrote is somewhat hingent on a team being able to pay all the pieces it requires while not filling holes with its own prospect bin. And no doubt, having guys come up from within and contribute while still in one of their first two contracts can very positively impact your cap situation while continuing your team's competitiveness.

Then again, you can naturally get cheap labor from the outside too, even on the prospect front. MacLean would be one such example at the moment.

For the NYI, even if the cap moves up considerably over the next two years, we're going to have a lot of money wrapped up in Dobson, Romanov, Pulock, Pelech, and Mayfield at some point. Should any of them no longer be able to perform - and we're already seeing problems in performance from Pelech and Mayfield - then we're gonna be in trouble here.

There are only so many Lee-like situations you can have on your team.

I think the team has recognized that by not only bringing in Romanov, but drafting Odelius, George, and even Schulz while adding Mitchell and Fulp recently from the outside.

But hey, things looked pretty bleak for Boston when they lost Bergeron and Krejci at once, and had to let Bertuzzi walk while trading away Foligno and Hall, only being able to replace them with cheaper players still on the upswing and a few very affordable vets perceived as being on the way out. It's not like Boston's prospect system is all that different from ours, even if Lohrei and Poitras have been able to contribute from within.

That's another topic though.

Our weak prospect bin (and Wheeler's prospect review came out today naming the NYI system last in the league) doesn't have to be a death knell or outlandish concern at this point. I think there's enough there to fill a few holes when the Pageaus, Palmieris, Clutterbucks, and Martins see their contracts run out. Then again, I can see Lou retaining a Pageau for 2 MM per on the next contract too, so there are going to be ways.

***
I recently mentioned this elsewhere, but I'll do it again here.

If Lou moves the '24 1st at the deadline or leading up to the draft, it will be the 5th first rounder in a row that he has moved.

Hasn't happened, but I don't think I can recall any team, and certainly not one single GM, ever moving 5 first in a row.

Might be wrong, but nothing jumps into my head.

I think the bottom line is the Isles will need players on team friendly contracts. Whether that is young players drafted, college free agents, European free agents or older NHL players on 1 or 2 year deals I don’t care.

I'm predicting, there'll be a few MacLean's should the squeeze ever come.

***
Otherwise, give me a call, Lou.

I have a couple of very affordable diamonds in the rough for you over here in Germany. Bring 'em to the farm and you'll be surprised!

 

[The Real JT]

It is true that all of what I wrote is somewhat hingent on a team being able to pay all the pieces it requires while not filling holes with its own prospect bin. And no doubt, having guys come up from within and contribute while still in one of their first two contracts can very positively impact your cap situation while continuing your team's competitiveness.

Then again, you can naturally get cheap labor from the outside too, even on the prospect front. MacLean would be one such example at the moment.

For the NYI, even if the cap moves up considerably over the next two years, we're going to have a lot of money wrapped up in Dobson, Romanov, Pulock, Pelech, and Mayfield at some point. Should any of them no longer be able to perform - and we're already seeing problems in performance from Pelech and Mayfield - then we're gonna be in trouble here.

There are only so many Lee-like situations you can have on your team.

I think the team has recognized that by not only bringing in Romanov, but drafting Odelius, George, and even Schulz while adding Mitchell and Fulp recently from the outside.

But hey, things looked pretty bleak for Boston when they lost Bergeron and Krejci at once, and had to let Bertuzzi walk while trading away Foligno and Hall, only being able to replace them with cheaper players still on the upswing and a few very affordable vets perceived as being on the way out. It's not like Boston's prospect system is all that different from ours, even if Lohrei and Poitras have been able to contribute from within.

That's another topic though.

Our weak prospect bin (and Wheeler's prospect review came out today naming the NYI system last in the league) doesn't have to be a death knell or outlandish concern at this point. I think there's enough there to fill a few holes when the Pageaus, Palmieris, Clutterbucks, and Martins see their contracts run out. Then again, I can see Lou retaining a Pageau for 2 MM per on the next contract too, so there are going to be ways.

***
I recently mentioned this elsewhere, but I'll do it again here.

If Lou moves the '24 1st at the deadline or leading up to the draft, it will be the 5th first rounder in a row that he has moved.

Hasn't happened, but I don't think I can recall any team, and certainly not one single GM, ever moving 5 first in a row.

Might be wrong, but nothing jumps into my head.



I'm predicting, there'll be a few MacLean's should the squeeze ever come.

***
Otherwise, give me a call, Lou.

I have a couple of very affordable diamonds in the rough for you over here in Germany. Bring 'em to the farm and you'll be surprised!

@Chapin Landvogt
Always appreciate your insight and knowledge.

My concern with the Isles is that these stopgap players never seem to be of much value for the Isles. I’ll name a few: Fasching, MacLean (incomplete grade), Gauthier, Andreoff, Czarnik, Timashov and a handful of draft picks that had a brief stint on the Island with not much to show for it.

We don’t need these players to be stars but if we could get production from a couple of them similar to what we got with Parise last year then that would go a long way towards solidifying our lineup and our chances to make the postseason. By the way, I’m not counting Parise on the list of players, because he felt some allegiance to the Island and opted to come here. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to see that happen again anytime soon.

 

[leeroggy]

@Chapin Landvogt
Always appreciate your insight and knowledge.

My concern with the Isles is that these stopgap players never seem to be of much value for the Isles. I’ll name a few: Fasching, MacLean (incomplete grade), Gauthier, Andreoff, Czarnik, Timashov and a handful of draft picks that had a brief stint on the Island with not much to show for it.

We don’t need these players to be stars but if we could get production from a couple of them similar to what we got with Parise last year then that would go a long way towards solidifying our lineup and our chances to make the postseason. By the way, I’m not counting Parise on the list of players, because he felt some allegiance to the Island and opted to come here. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to see that happen again anytime soon.

How many here honestly saw potentially 20 goals from Holmstrom this year?

Chapin mentioned the D above. I've been on the Dufour bandwagon and certainly there's a lot to like in Danny Nelson. You only need a few to come through.

 

[xECK29x]

This will be unpopular, but you don't have to have a strong prospect system. People love 'em and there's an appeal to having shiny toys in the cupboard to get excited about.

But if you've got your 2-3 top guns and you're stud Dman and a goalie you think you can win with at the NHL level, then the rest of the job is adding pieces bit by bit at the pro level.

The big advantage of having any prospects for the Isles right now would be in having trading pieces.

But draft picks are trading pieces too, and we know that Lou sees them as such.

The team in no way is reliant on good young talent from within. It helps to have depth in case of injuries, but if an upgrade is desired, it'll be acquired elsewhere.

This said, the Isles clearly look for late round gems every summer in their average of 4.5 picks per draft, like every team should. But it's clearly open as to whether any of those guys are being seen as future Islanders.

Another thing is that plenty of other teams pick and pick and pick, but do so knowing they won't be able to sign half of these players down the line. Sure, they too can use them as trade currency, but ultimately, almost all of them have to let guys walk because they just don't have the contract space. So, almost every draft is conducted knowing that plenty of those guys are gonna be first time free agents within 3 years.

Not like the Isles are out there constantly adding such players. But the option is there.

Yell this at everyone at the Athletic, it’s such a stupid thing to “measure”

 

[The Real JT]

How many here honestly saw potentially 20 goals from Holmstrom this year?

Chapin mentioned the D above. I've been on the Dufour bandwagon and certainly there's a lot to like in Danny Nelson. You only need a few to come through.

Holmstrom has been a pleasant surprise but most would still peg him as a bottom 6 player long term.

Like you, I’m excited about Dufour. Size, heavy shot, Memorial Cup winner. He’s had a decent season but not exceptional. Maggio hasn’t scored much which is his calling card and Ishakov should get a shot but I just think he’s too small.

The next wave: Nelson, Finley. I’ll keep the faith but it’s gonna likely be at least 2 years before any of them can realistically contribute at the NHL level.

 

[leeroggy]

Holmstrom has been a pleasant surprise but most would still peg him as a bottom 6 player long term.

Like you, I’m excited about Dufour. Size, heavy shot, Memorial Cup winner. He’s had a decent season but not exceptional. Maggio hasn’t scored much which is his calling card and Ishakov should get a shot but I just think he’s too small.

The next wave: Nelson, Finley. I’ll keep the faith but it’s gonna likely be at least 2 years before any of them can realistically contribute at the NHL level.

I'll disagree on Holmstrom. I think Roy is focusing on him playing with the puck more and I see 30 goals in a few years as his production per year. His release/shot is high end.

 

[xECK29x]

https://x.com/philzfacts/status/1752419150235091282?s=46&t=TUc0shQ_DNE52S45Wn6kaQ

 

[xECK29x]

https://x.com/philzfacts/status/1752445426723078500?s=46&t=TUc0shQ_DNE52S45Wn6kaQ

 

[BelovedIsles]

I understand you're just illustrating your ongoing point, but this really isn't anything we didn't know.

I do surmise that there are some diamonds in the rough though.

 

[SI]

This should be posted in the Prospect Thread not here.

MODS - can we move this discussion to the prospect thread.

 

[saintunspecified]

I mean, rankings don't necessarily mean all that much, but it is pretty difficult to argue that the cupboard isn't mostly bare.

 

[periferal]

Eck posted this in the prospects thread:



I think that's enough evidence to not take any of these rankings seriously.

Actually I think it's more than enough evidence to not take our scouting department seriously.

 

[Torrey Redux]

I don't think anyone is kidding themselves, but these rankings are completely meaningless. It takes one good draft and things can change quickly.

Wow, meaningless. So you would be willing to stand pat with what the Isles have in the pipeline vs say swapping with Anaheim or Columbus or Detroit? I mean, if it's all meaningless and the ratings have no validity then it's just one big crap shoot and one prospect pool is as likely to pan out as another, right?

Such ratings may not be perfect, far from it, and drafting is certainly not the only thing an organization needs to do well to build a winner, but such ratings do generally reflect the level of talent in each organizations farm system (or the drafted players they control) and in that respect they have value. As for your "one good draft" theory, if you're picking middle bottom every year and/or you've traded your early round picks away (because just making the playoffs becomes the goal), the chances of your having even "one good draft" diminish greatly.

 

[periferal]

This will be unpopular, but you don't have to have a strong prospect system. People love 'em and there's an appeal to having shiny toys in the cupboard to get excited about.

But if you've got your 2-3 top guns and you're stud Dman and a goalie you think you can win with at the NHL level, then the rest of the job is adding pieces bit by bit at the pro level.

The big advantage of having any prospects for the Isles right now would be in having trading pieces.

This is very true, but also relative to each team. Prospects playing in juniors or your AHL affiliate are doing zero to help an NHL team win a Cup.

That each of the 32 NHL teams are in different places in terms of how close they are to a Cup. It would be very reasonable for a team like Boston or Vegas to trade away prospects to try and win a Cup this year because they are legit contenders.

Conversely it would be counterproductive for teams like the Predators or Kraken to trade away young talent to make a run because, if they're being honest, they aren't good enough yet and should be focusing on building those core "top guns" that you alluded to.

Not sure if you're saying that the Isles currently have their "2-3 top guns" playing on the roster already, but I don't think they do. I think everyone would say that the future "core" of this team is Barzal, Horvat, Dobson, (and Sorokin, but not as he's playing currently).

However look at the "top guns" of just a few of real contenders out there...

• Boston: Pastrnak, Marchand, McAvoy
• Colorado: MacKinnon, Rantanen, Makar
• Vegas: Eichel, Stone, Pietrangelo
• Florida: Barkov, Tkachuk, Ekblad

All of their "cores" are easily a level or two above the Isles. And we didn't even mention Dallas, Edmonton, Carolina, the rangers, etc, but all of those teams have not only more "top" talent, but better rosters overall.

Add in the fact that the Isles entered this season as the 3rd oldest team and I think the argument needs to be made that more young talent (prospects) need to be added into the organization and ASAP. To not do so is both not admitting the fading state of this team, but also going to push back any future Cup contention further into the future.

 

[periferal]

I know the point you're trying to make is that the Athletic (or any publication) doesn't really know jack about ranking prospects and therefore we shouldn't take seriously the 32nd prospect pool ranking they just gave the Isles.

However the more subtle, yet more serious, point that tweet made is that that the Islanders scouting and development staff is actually more embarrassing than the Athletic.

 

[PK Cronin]

Actually I think it's more than enough evidence to not take our scouting department seriously.

An online publication ranks the Islanders one of the best prospect pools in the NHL 6 years ago and they were wrong. Now that same online publication ranks the Islanders as the worst prospect pool and you're takeaway is that our scouting department is the issue...

Let me be clear, the scouting and development can be an issue but these articles from The Athletic shouldn't be used to make that determination at all.

Wow, meaningless. So you would be willing to stand pat with what the Isles have in the pipeline vs say swapping with Anaheim or Columbus or Detroit? I mean, if it's all meaningless and the ratings have no validity then it's just one big crap shoot and one prospect pool is as likely to pan out as another, right?

I don't know enough about the pipelines of other teams to comment. Would I blindly swap prospect pools with other organizations without actually watching the prospects myself? No, absolutely not.

The rankings are quite literally meaningless. There is nothing that happens to them if they're wrong or right, they have no impact on what the NHL teams do. It's fan fodder and nothing more. Dom Luczyzzadfnadfdfn posts a model every year with his predictions, does that make it meaningful in some way? Absolutely not.

And also, you're really reaching if you took my comments to mean that it's a big crap shoot or that one prospect pool is as likely as another to pan out. Obviously that's not the case, though there is an element of luck/chance/randomness when drafting as well. The post is specifically about this website providing a ranking as if there's some objective way to do so and as though they're an authority on the matter when they're glorified bloggers.

Such ratings may not be perfect, far from it, and drafting is certainly not the only thing an organization needs to do well to build a winner, but such ratings do generally reflect the level of talent in each organizations farm system (or the drafted players they control) and in that respect they have value. As for your "one good draft" theory, if you're picking middle bottom every year and/or you've traded your early round picks away (because just making the playoffs becomes the goal), the chances of your having even "one good draft" diminish greatly.

The point I was making is why are any of you putting trust into a ranking system that has proven to be wrong in the past (and not just wrong, but hilariously wrong)? You shouldn't, it's stupid. It's no different than rankings we do here on this website.

 

[Throttle]

It doesn't take a genius to add up that a team consistently trading away its picks and a very average scouting unit it dead last in the standings. It's what Lou wants, really.

Yup, that’s what he wants…

The fun in this scenario is that the picks he traded away and the return on those picks have contributed to the team. Two trade’s directly contributed to two back to back conference finals. One trade accelerated and guaranteed a young cost controlled defensemen that is now a Top 4 d-man.

Oh, and two other picks got you the BEST player on this team that resigned prior to being a UFA. And that also put the team in the playoffs.

 

[PK Cronin]

I know the point you're trying to make is that the Athletic (or any publication) doesn't really know jack about ranking prospects and therefore we shouldn't take seriously the 32nd prospect pool ranking they just gave the Isles.

However the more subtle, yet more serious, point that tweet made is that that the Islanders scouting and development staff is actually more embarrassing than the Athletic.

No it isn't, that's what you're choosing to takeaway.

You're saying that 2018 rankings were wrong, but that's because the Islanders can't draft or develop players. Now you're saying the 2024 rankings are right because the Islanders can't draft or develop players. You aren't even considering the possibility that the current ranking could be wrong and someone will pop off in the NHL.

I'm not saying that's likely, my issue is with whatever logic and reasoning you're trying to apply here. There are a lot of ways to bash the Islanders drafting and developing and relying on The Athletic at all is not one of them.

 

[The Real JT]

I’m not entirely against trading away first round draft picks in the right situation. I liked the Romanov trade from the beginning and that seems to be working out quite well. The Horvat trade is also working out well but it’s also one of those few trades that has worked out well for the other team (Vancouver) as well as for Detroit who ultimately got our first round pick(that selection is looking really good).

Trading first round picks now and then, in the right situation is absolutely fine. Taking that to an extreme, trading first round picks year after year is not without consequences. If your hindsight is that we’ve swung and missed on first rounders in the past then my reply is “just draft better and improve your scouting”.

We arguably have two homegrown young players of NHL caliber. Their names are Holmstrom and Dobson. Both of them were first round picks. That alone should tell you something.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

I’m not entirely against trading away first round draft picks in the right situation. I liked the Romanov trade from the beginning and that seems to be working out quite well. The Horvat trade is also working out well but it’s also one of those few trades that has worked out well for the other team (Vancouver) as well as for Detroit who ultimately got our first round pick(that selection is looking really good).

Trading first round picks now and then, in the right situation is absolutely fine. Taking that to an extreme, trading first round picks year after year is not without consequences. If your hindsight is that we’ve swung and missed on first rounders in the past then my reply is “just draft better and improve your scouting”.

We arguably have two homegrown young players of value. Their names are Holmstrom and Dobson. Both of them were first round picks. That alone should tell you something.

And Barzal!

And although not a first rounder, Sorokin was a pick as well.

 

[periferal]

An online publication ranks the Islanders one of the best prospect pools in the NHL 6 years ago and they were wrong. Now that same online publication ranks the Islanders as the worst prospect pool and you're takeaway is that our scouting department is the issue...

No it isn't, that's what you're choosing to takeaway.

You're saying that 2018 rankings were wrong, but that's because the Islanders can't draft or develop players. Now you're saying the 2024 rankings are right because the Islanders can't draft or develop players. You aren't even considering the possibility that the current ranking could be wrong and someone will pop off in the NHL.

I'm not saying that's likely, my issue is with whatever logic and reasoning you're trying to apply here. There are a lot of ways to bash the Islanders drafting and developing and relying on The Athletic at all is not one of them.

Incorrect.

YOU are "choosing" to make this conversation about The Athletic. I could give a shit about The Athletic.

What I am saying is that Wahlstrom, Ho-Sang, Wilde, and many of the other prospects that made The Athletic rank the Isles farm system #5 overall in 2018 have not panned out. That means that either the Isles scouts and/or development staff failed.

So who cares if the Islanders actually do have the "32nd ranked prospect pool." What is notable is that right now they are desperate to have more young talent in their lineup than Fashing, Aho, McLean, Bolduc, etc, and there aren't any options.

There are several reasons why this team isn't going to come close to a Cup this season and the scouting department over the. past decade or so, along with Lou giving them very few picks recently, are a big reason why.

 

[doublechili]

However the more subtle, yet more serious, point that tweet made is that that the Islanders scouting and development staff is actually more embarrassing than the Athletic.

There are two separate issues: (1) keeping vs trading away first round picks; and (2) the team's scouting and development performance.

Re: the second one, I think the scouts have done a good job with the picks they've made (eg., Dufour, Nelson, Finley, etc.).

As for development, the team has gone from rushing prospects years ago to really taking their time lately. So, for example, after several years of hearing the drumbeat of Holmstrom being such a terrible pick, he marinated into looking better than the guys "we should have taken".