I thought Wheeler's ranking and write ups were pretty fair, he explained basically what we all agree here as well that we have good depth but no real elite talent. I know some are super high on Stancl recently and I'd probably have him a couple spots higher but I thought it was a pretty fair unbiased write up.
Prospect Info: Blues 2024-2025 Prospect Thread
- Thread starter simon IC
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,780
- 14,826
I agreed with a big chunk of his Blues write up and projections. I agree with Wheeler way more than I agree with Pronman, but I do find that a lot of times I agree with Wheeler's individual opinions/analysis, but then disagree with his conclusions.
For example, reading the Blues/Flames write ups, I leave with the conclusion that the Blues have a better prospect pool. He obviously disagrees and it appears that the rationale is largely (if not exclusively) based on Parekh being a better prospect than any individual prospect we have. I don't disagree with his assessment of Parekh vs our prospects, but I don't think that gap offsets the quantity of higher quality prospects we have or the variety of those prospects that we have.
We have 5 guys before he gets to his 'everyone else' tier while Calgary has just 3. After those top 3 prospects, the guys he has ranked 4th through 7th are all offensively inclined D men whose upside is a bottom pair, PP2 guy. That's 5 D in their top 7 prospect group who will all be competing for similar roles (although you assume Parekh is the clear frontrunner for PP1) and the biggest guy in the group is 6'1." That is a lot of overlapping player type.
I'd take our prospect pool over Calgary's with no hesitation, even if you could guarantee that Parekh would be the best individual player from the two groups.
taylord22
Registered User
- Mar 30, 2009
- 1,596
- 485
The separation between “superstar” and “elite” is clear, the separation between “elite” and “top 6” is mostly nonsense. Some objectivity and useful measures, but preference, exposure and group-think are the real drivers.
I like Wheeler. This list is far more consistent and logical than others, but, the separation at the top level is truly a crap shoot on every post draft list.
Last edited:
i would read the prospect write ups. They have good information. How someone ranks our prospects has 0 effect on how they develop. Does it matter if we are 14 or 7? Honestly not really. As long as the info is correct- strengths and weaknesses the ready really doesn’t matter.
Makes sense. If he cant make the big club it is better for him.
After seeing Stenberg and Robertsson come in, I would go home too. They both are very talented.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,780
- 14,826
I think I'd take ours, although I like Sennecke a lot. I'm still baffled that he was left of Canada's World Junior roster this year.
I have the Luneau/Solberg duo of D prospects roughly on par Lindstein/Jiricek. I think that I could see arguments in both directions. Jiricek and Luneau both have a development season that was largely lost due to injury. I see a higher floor for the Ducks duo, but I have Jircek as the highest ceiling. Both duos are split righty/lefty and Anaheim's are further along the development path (2022 and 2023 draft class vs 2023 and 2024 draft class). I have a hard time saying that either side has an 'edge' over the other with the duo of D prospects. I think the Ducks duo fits their long-term needs better than our group would and I think our duo meets our long term needs better than theirs would. For arguments sake, if you give the Ducks duo the edge, I wouldn't say the gap is large.
Which leads us to the comparison largely being between Sennecke as a truly top end prospect vs Dvorsky/Snuggy/Stenberg trio of really good prospects before getting into the 'depth' of the pool. I wouldn't trade Dvorsky, Snuggy, and Stenberg for Sennecke. I also wouldn't trade our top 5 prospects for their top 3 prospects.
Anaheim's pool would blow ours out of the water if we included all the U-23 players on NHL rosters. I think they are in the conversation for best pool of U-23 players in the league and they make a case as the best-positioned long-term organizational outlook in the league. But for the criteria of this prospect list, I'm pretty comfortable stacking up our pool vs theirs.
- Feb 12, 2008
- 20,262
- 9,795
So you’re saying starting in 3 years, it’s going to the Blues/Ducks in the conferences finals every year? I’m down
Kerber said this on the radio broadcast last night as well, caught me off guard
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
Stancl posting data
Sept 1x
Oct 4x
Nov 4x
Dec 5x
pre WJC
I made it easy, I tried to get rid of everything I have been saying about all our prospects in this thread, there were about 200 posts to delete, not just any that mentioned the word Stancl anywhere.
(I did leave 14 posts up, just the ones about Stancl before the WJC which was the first time I discovered him)
Sept 1x
Oct 4x
Nov 4x
Dec 5x
pre WJC
I made it easy, I tried to get rid of everything I have been saying about all our prospects in this thread, there were about 200 posts to delete, not just any that mentioned the word Stancl anywhere.
(I did leave 14 posts up, just the ones about Stancl before the WJC which was the first time I discovered him)
I don’t disagree other than to say that Sennecke is I think a level above anyone we have and that is likely more valuable than our better 4-6 guys. But I wouldn’t object with ranking us over them. We are both far better than Flames.
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
This seems like well adjusted healthy behavior.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
You thanked me with appreciation back in Dec but I didn't respond because I knew you weren't sincere
Always entitling yourself to comment to me about what you think of me.
Last edited:
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
You have a way of making every opinion a character judgement of the person who expresses it. I fundamentally disagree with that way of engaging people on the forum. Great posters who are worthwhile people often make dumb flawed arguments. Haven’t we all done it at some time?
Why are you so desperate for credit for observing Stancl making a surge? Your recent efforts to amplify the visibility of your observations make it look like the important part isn’t the fact of his development, but of who gets to call, “First!” I was calling you on that. I would and have done the same type of thing with people who are my friends and they don’t assume every interaction we’ve ever had was false. They carry on the conversation and eventually call ME out when I do something foolish.
I don’t expect you to converse with me in a congenial way here, but I’m just saying it could go that way if you chose to.
LetsGoBooze
Let the re-tool breathe
- Jan 16, 2012
- 2,525
- 1,767
I personally enjoy posters having different takes on prospects and expect most opinions to be very subjective, especially for young prospects that are hard to follow or view full games of. Nothing wrong with sharing insights or personal feelings along the way. I have noticed some posters are more rose tinted glasses and others pessimistic, and theres nothing wrong with either viewpoint. I think we have had many healthy discussions along the way and there is always room for those...kinda the point of a forum. However, if posters are coming on just to start arguments, thats when things can get old quick... or worse if they turn to personal attacks.
I think going through an extended down period in our franchise is frustrating for most and unfortunately its boiling over in here a bit. This year has seemingly had a fair bit animosity, which is unfortunate. Im hoping we can all come together and extend a little more respect to one another. HFBlues is a great resource for us with a deep passion for our team, and if posters are here for the right reasons its ok to have different views because we all have the same goal: Another Cup.
I think going through an extended down period in our franchise is frustrating for most and unfortunately its boiling over in here a bit. This year has seemingly had a fair bit animosity, which is unfortunate. Im hoping we can all come together and extend a little more respect to one another. HFBlues is a great resource for us with a deep passion for our team, and if posters are here for the right reasons its ok to have different views because we all have the same goal: Another Cup.
Last edited:
Buffalo is 11. Their top prospect has been in nhl for months, which is kind of bogus when he didn’t include Bolduc. Even so, I’d take our pool over theirs. So that is at least 2 of the 3 ahead of us I’d rank us ahead of so far.
I don’t disagree with you but man I would sure like to have Anton Wahlberg in our pool. He’s looked really good in my viewings. He has him way too low in their pool in my opinion. He just didn’t have him high on his draft board.
ezcreepin
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2016
- 2,728
- 2,499
Yea, I think the labels are difficult to use when evaluating prospects and rankings feel slightly better, but a lot of the same issues. I like the pyramid model which sort of encapsulates elite and top 6 players in a group, lower end top 6 and middle 6, low end middle 6 and bottom 6, etc.
These evaluators have a tough job creating these lists, but with each groups own "scouts" on this board, I think you can get a decent idea of where these players are at with some generally good consistency.
I would like to watch more of Dvorsky for his defense, but his offense is clearly there. His shot is nasty (especially sharp angles), his passing is an underrated asset, he sort of has an O'Reilly/Perron ability to hold the puck that's still developing - much like I said about Toropchenko, if he can really develop his defensive game to the pro level and become a nice option as a 2nd unit pk'er, I think he is going to be an excellent 1A/1B with Thomas. It really feels like they are another O'Reilly and Schenn group in terms of skill, less so in style.
Rant aside, I agree with you
ChicagoBlues
Terraformers
- Oct 24, 2006
- 16,999
- 7,598
I still think Lindstein will need more time than we'd like. His D+1 was in Sweden's lower league, therefore lesser competition overall. This season (D+2), Brynas elevated to the SHL and is not danger of being relegated again.
He will probably at least start the season in Brynas next fall and hopefully take strides enough for the Blues to bring him over during his D+3 season. Whether that is directly to the NHL or a stint in the AHL is a question, of course. My guess is that he'd go straight to Springfield.
Timeline something like this:
2024-25 D+2
SHL
2025-26 D+3
SHL/AHL
2026-27 D+4
AHL/NHL
2027-28 D+5
NHL
He will probably at least start the season in Brynas next fall and hopefully take strides enough for the Blues to bring him over during his D+3 season. Whether that is directly to the NHL or a stint in the AHL is a question, of course. My guess is that he'd go straight to Springfield.
Timeline something like this:
2024-25 D+2
SHL
2025-26 D+3
SHL/AHL
2026-27 D+4
AHL/NHL
2027-28 D+5
NHL
I don’t think he will come over mid season. He’s got a history with Brynas. You typically only do that when guy is in bad situation. Blues will decide whether to bring him over this Summer and that is where he will be all year.
ChicagoBlues
Terraformers
- Oct 24, 2006
- 16,999
- 7,598
BadgersandBlues
Registered User
- Jun 6, 2011
- 1,989
- 1,646
The last four pools have leaned heavily on the "top guy" being better then any single prospect in our pool, but I still think our top five is better then any of the Calgary/Anaheim/Buffalo/Seattle. I wouldn't trade Dvo and Snuggy for Parekh, Sennecke, Catton, or Helenius. After that I think our next 3-4 prospects are significantly higher then any other team's next 4 prospects.
I also think that it's silly he's allowing Devon Levi as a prospect but not Hofer. Hofer has all of 15 more starts then Levi over the course of their careers. It technically fits his criteria, as Hofer is clearly our backup goalie and was last year, but Levi was clearly their backup goalie last year too but lost his net to James f***ing Reimer lol. Maybe pump the brakes on Devon Levi a bit.
I also think that it's silly he's allowing Devon Levi as a prospect but not Hofer. Hofer has all of 15 more starts then Levi over the course of their careers. It technically fits his criteria, as Hofer is clearly our backup goalie and was last year, but Levi was clearly their backup goalie last year too but lost his net to James f***ing Reimer lol. Maybe pump the brakes on Devon Levi a bit.
Latest posts
-
Roster/Rumors/Speculation/Trade Talk - 2024-25: Re-Tool, Re-Group, Re-Mix, Re-Build- Latest: Richie Daggers Crime
-
