Prospect Info: Blues 2024-2025 Prospect Thread

[BadgersandBlues]

I've been frustrated with our usage of Bolduc this season for two reasons:

1. It's been pretty clear to me since Monty took over that the third winger with the Thomas/Buch pairing needs to be a finisher. Bolduc's got one of the best shots on our team and showed some nice chemistry with Thomas last season. When we were trying to actually win games, he seemed like a natural fit.

2. All the other guys we've tried on that pairing haven't brought squat to the table. Overall Neighbors has less 5v5 points then Bolduc in 10 more games played, and has played the majority of his 5v5 minutes with Thomas since Monty took over. Saad, Texier, and ofc Kyrou have also played a bunch on that line, yet Bolduc's seen all of 15 total 5v5 minutes with Thomas and Buch. Why do we keep rewarding Neighbors with prime minutes? He hasn't shown any semblence of being a top 6 winger this season, and he's had pretty bad defensive metrics compared to Bolduc (Althought with obviously tougher QoC).

Final note, and this really has nothing to do with prospects, but it's been irking me for awhile and Brian talking about QoC seemed like a good time to slip it in - I'm tired of the Blues hard matching the Thomas line up against the other team's top line. I get why we do it, and in the future we might want to go back to doing it again, but the only value our 4th line of Walker-Faksa-Toro brings is that they're actually extremely defensively responsible for a 4th line, and yet we don't use them as what many old-school fans would call a checking line. I'd really like to see Thomas feast on a bit lighter competition, especially if that means we can ease a guy like Bolduc or Snuggy in there.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

Yes, he is getting better offensive deployment, but it's not crazy offensive deployment at 54.88%. All the top 6 guys and Bolduc are between 50,8 and 56%.

He hasn't produced? 2.14 per 60 with Holloway would put him tied for 2nd on the team with our leading point scorer Kyrou. All of those stats you listed are better than Neighbours by a wide margin, and all the ones without Schenn are better production than Schenn has. The worst P/60 listed aside from Schenn, his P/60 with Kyoru, would out him 5th on the team.

Look what he has done for Neighbours. Sure, his P/60 with Neighbours is ONLY 1.91 p/60. Neighbours P/60 with Bolduc is 1.46, but without him its 1.06. That is a huge jump playing with Bolduc. And his production over Neighbours means to me, that Neighbours is not one of the top guys. He should be the one on the 3rd line. Because he has not produced at 5v5 at all and his most common line mates are Thomas and Buchnevich. And he is 1.39 with Buchnevich and 1.01 with Thomas. those are both far less than Bolduc, yet he has 345 and 295 minutes with each respectively.

Neighbors has honestly been one of the biggest disappointments of this season. He's been continually gifted a top 6 role and done nothing with it. As it stands right now, he's easily my #1 trade bait winger to improve either the Center or RHD positions AINEC (Of guys I think who have value and aren't magic beans, like a Stancel or Robertsson).

 

[Brian39]

Yes, he is getting better offensive deployment, but it's not crazy offensive deployment at 54.88%. All the top 6 guys and Bolduc are between 50,8 and 56%.

He hasn't produced? 2.14 per 60 with Holloway would put him tied for 2nd on the team with our leading point scorer Kyrou. All of those stats you listed are better than Neighbours by a wide margin, and all the ones without Schenn are better production than Schenn has. The worst P/60 listed aside from Schenn, his P/60 with Kyoru, would out him 5th on the team.

Look what he has done for Neighbours. Sure, his P/60 with Neighbours is ONLY 1.91 p/60. Neighbours P/60 with Bolduc is 1.46, but without him its 1.06. That is a huge jump playing with Bolduc. And his production over Neighbours means to me, that Neighbours is not one of the top guys. He should be the one on the 3rd line. Because he has not produced at 5v5 at all and his most common line mates are Thomas and Buchnevich. And he is 1.39 with Buchnevich and 1.01 with Thomas. those are both far less than Bolduc, yet he has 345 and 295 minutes with each respectively.

You said that his production would be less because he's stapled to Sunny. But he scores more with Sunny than he has with better players (except Holloway). He hasn't seen an uptick in production when he goes up the lineup. Notice how I said that 'he hasn't seen a drastic uptick in production' and not 'he hasn't produced.'

His production with Holloway has come when Holloway moves down the lineup, not when Bolduc moves up in the lineup. Bolduc hasn't scored a goal in the 75 minutes he's played with either of our top 6 centers. That isn't going to convince the coach to keep him up there for longer stretches. And while the 3rd line has looked good when Holloway is down there with Bolduc, that has generally caused one (or both) of the top 6 lines to struggle and I think there is a great argument that developing Holloway as a top 6 player is more important than using him to help Bolduc on the 3rd line.

Again, I'm not knocking Bolduc. I'm really happy with his play, but I very much disagree that he's just getting screwed for no reason. He's a young player who is excelling in the sheltered role he has been given. In a perfect world, we'd have a better 3C to help him along, but that doesn't mean that we need to get him into the top 6.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Yeah, the issue is more that we don't have other talented 3rd liners than him earning a top 6 spot and it being denied. Even on the PP, Sunny is there for the net front role, Bolduc isn't playing in that spot.

 

[Brian39]

2. All the other guys we've tried on that pairing haven't brought squat to the table. Overall Neighbors has less 5v5 points then Bolduc in 10 more games played, and has played the majority of his 5v5 minutes with Thomas since Monty took over. Saad, Texier, and ofc Kyrou have also played a bunch on that line, yet Bolduc's seen all of 15 total 5v5 minutes with Thomas and Buch. Why do we keep rewarding Neighbors with prime minutes? He hasn't shown any semblence of being a top 6 winger this season, and he's had pretty bad defensive metrics compared to Bolduc (Althought with obviously tougher QoC).

In large part because development isn't linear and he had 27 goals last season (19 at even strength) as a 21 year old. He forced the Blues to keep increasing his usage by scoring goals and while he has deep flaws to other elements of his game, he endears himself to the room/coaches by being extremely physical and fighting 4 times in his young NHL career. He seized his opportunities as they came last year and 'proved it.' Every coach in the league is going to default to those guys unless/until unproven guys seize their opportunities and force slumpers down the lineup.

The reality of the NHL is that there are exactly zero teams that function on a present-performance-meritocracy. Past performance plays a large role in decision making all across the league.

I would have absolutely zero problem reducing the deployment we're giving Neighbours and I agree that he has not been a top 6 winger this season. But the season he had last year is going to buy a good chunk of benefit of the doubt that they can continue developing. I also think it is worth noting that he is a minute per night behind our 5th most used forward at even strength and his ice time has been creeping downward through the season. His 13:06 a night at even strength since the New Year is 2:48 a night behind Schenn (who is 5th among forwards) and is over a minute a night less than he was averaging before the New Year. His leash has noticeably shortened. I'm in favor of further reducing his even strength usage more, but it isn't like the coaching staff isn't reacting to his disappointing season.

 

[Majorityof1]

You said that his production would be less because he's stapled to Sunny. But he scores more with Sunny than he has with better players (except Holloway). He hasn't seen an uptick in production when he goes up the lineup. Notice how I said that 'he hasn't seen a drastic uptick in production' and not 'he hasn't produced.'

His production with Holloway has come when Holloway moves down the lineup, not when Bolduc moves up in the lineup. Bolduc hasn't scored a goal in the 75 minutes he's played with either of our top 6 centers. That isn't going to convince the coach to keep him up there for longer stretches. And while the 3rd line has looked good when Holloway is down there with Bolduc, that has generally caused one (or both) of the top 6 lines to struggle and I think there is a great argument that developing Holloway as a top 6 player is more important than using him to help Bolduc on the 3rd line.

Again, I'm not knocking Bolduc. I'm really happy with his play, but I very much disagree that he's just getting screwed for no reason. He's a young player who is excelling in the sheltered role he has been given. In a perfect world, we'd have a better 3C to help him along, but that doesn't mean that we need to get him into the top 6.

I would say its 2-fold why his numbers while still better than most the team are slightly less with better players. (1) It takes time to build chemistry. His sample size with top 6 talent is all small and scattered. We're talking 60 minutes with Buch. that's not points per 60, that's just points. Thomas is half as much. And it hasn't been a consistent multiple game stretch with those guys, its a game here, a game there. Probably not many practices with them either. How can you expect to find chemistry that way?

(2) He's been bounced up and down and out of the line-up for incomprehensible things. I'd think he may be playing ultra, ultra conservatively when getting the tougher deployment on the top line because he knows if Monty thinks he sneezes funny he'll be in the press box the next game. That's the wrong thought process for a young kid, but you can see he is tentative with the top line. I think saying, hey, here's a several-game stretch with Thomas and Buchnevich and we aren't taking you out. Go have fun and show us what you got would do wonders.

The reality of the NHL is that there are exactly zero teams that function on a present-performance-meritocracy. Past performance plays a large role in decision making all across the league.

Would you say overall, that is for the better or detriment to teams? In other words, would teams perform better if they did treat it like more of a meritocracy? If teams would be better served being more meritocratic, shouldn't we strive for that as well?

 

[Brian39]

Would you say overall, that is for the better or detriment to teams? In other words, would teams perform better if they did treat it like more of a meritocracy? If teams would be better served being more meritocratic, shouldn't we strive for that as well?

Overwhelmingly to the betterment.

Jordan Binnington isn't in net for Canada in that gold medal game in a 'what have you done for me only lately' meritocracy. Knowing that your studs are your studs and will play their way out of slumps is a massively important trait for a coach to have. Getting your team from point A to point Z isn't just about having the best performance at each individual point along the way.

Jon Cooper tagging Binner as his guy based on what he knew he could do and then being rewarded for it is exactly why you don't just ignore the past. Obviously there has to be a point where you change your assessment, but you have to trust your past evaluation of players and do what you can to get a struggling guy back to what you've seen him do before.

 

[jjniner]

Would you all give up Neighbors for Nemec?

 

[BlueMed]

Would you all give up Neighbors for Nemec?

Yes, absolutely.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Would you all give up Neighbors for Nemec?

Yes

 

[Mike Liut]

Would you all give up Neighbors for Nemec?

Would they?

 

[bleedblue1223]

Would they?

I think it's possible. I do think something eventually happens with him or Casey. I don't see both lasting in Jersey, and both are pushing for NHL time.

 

[Majorityof1]

Overwhelmingly to the betterment.

Jordan Binnington isn't in net for Canada in that gold medal game in a 'what have you done for me only lately' meritocracy. Knowing that your studs are your studs and will play their way out of slumps is a massively important trait for a coach to have. Getting your team from point A to point Z isn't just about having the best performance at each individual point along the way.

Jon Cooper tagging Binner as his guy based on what he knew he could do and then being rewarded for it is exactly why you don't just ignore the past. Obviously there has to be a point where you change your assessment, but you have to trust your past evaluation of players and do what you can to get a struggling guy back to what you've seen him do before.

I don't think Cooper's decision on Binnington is a great example. That is definitely applying past performance on the margins. It's not like Cooper had to decide between Binnington and Shesterkin, and went with the one who won in the past. He went with Binnington over Adin Hill who has a .903 behind Vegas' D core. They were close and Binnington's past performance was the tie breaker.

I think their obviously has to be combination of past performance, current performance and potential future performance (aka development). Also, I apparently cannot spell performance, because I had to use spell check on all 4 of those uses. But that's beside the point. If we went solely on past-performance (yay, got it right), we wouldn't have demoted Steen to our 4th line, we would have given Backes that awful contract Boston gave him, we wouldn't have moved Saad out. There are examples where you need to move on or readjust your expectations.

You also need to analyze the past performance to see what factors led to that past success. For example, some decent goalies have won the cup behind stacked teams. You'd be silly to pay them huge salaries hoping they carry you to victory. Neighbours scored well last year at 5v5, but not amazing. He was 1.4 last year. He was bolstered by PP scoring where he was one of the top 90 forwards in the league (which is 1st PP unit production on a PP that struggled most of last year). Demoting him at 5v5 to the 3rd line, you could still give him PP time which would be honoring his past PP success while recognizing the realities that he doesn't drive play at 5v5.

 

[StlBigFly]

Ive flipped to bullish. Make whatever trades need to be made then let’s go on a playoff run.

 

[jjniner]

I proposed the Neighbors for Nemec on the big board and they are all over it. They need a young cost controlled winger and are loaded on the back end.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

I don’t think it’s Neighbours’ fault that he has to play in the top 6 right now. So it goes on a bottom-10 team. Someone will eventually come along and push him down into a role he’s better suited for: a chippy, forechecking middle-6er with a unique (for us) ability to score from in tight.

But I think he’s the kind of guy you win championships with. I’d be very hesitant to trade him. He’s a rare kind of player who has proven he belongs at a young age, but isn’t ever going to threaten for like a $6m+ contract. In terms of managing the cap, those guys are pure gold.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I’d trade Neighbours for Nemec and wouldn’t think twice about it.

I’d roll the dice on Nemec being a good top-4 defenseman. Neighbours looks to be about what I expected him to be and while that’s fine, I’d rather have a future Top-4 of:

Broberg - Nemec
Lindstein - Parayko

With potential for Fischer and Jiricek to move into that group later.

 

[Brian39]

I don't think Cooper's decision on Binnington is a great example. That is definitely applying past performance on the margins. It's not like Cooper had to decide between Binnington and Shesterkin, and went with the one who won in the past. He went with Binnington over Adin Hill who has a .903 behind Vegas' D core. They were close and Binnington's past performance was the tie breaker.

I think their obviously has to be combination of past performance, current performance and potential future performance (aka development). Also, I apparently cannot spell performance, because I had to use spell check on all 4 of those uses. But that's beside the point. If we went solely on past-performance (yay, got it right), we wouldn't have demoted Steen to our 4th line, we would have given Backes that awful contract Boston gave him, we wouldn't have moved Saad out. There are examples where you need to move on or readjust your expectations.

You also need to analyze the past performance to see what factors led to that past success. For example, some decent goalies have won the cup behind stacked teams. You'd be silly to pay them huge salaries hoping they carry you to victory. Neighbours scored well last year at 5v5, but not amazing. He was 1.4 last year. He was bolstered by PP scoring where he was one of the top 90 forwards in the league (which is 1st PP unit production on a PP that struggled most of last year). Demoting him at 5v5 to the 3rd line, you could still give him PP time which would be honoring his past PP success while recognizing the realities that he doesn't drive play at 5v5.

...and Team Canada chose their goalies over at least 2 other guys who were having clearly better seasons when the roster was picked a quarter of the way through the NHL season. Thompson and Blackwood are both on team Canada in a 'right now' meritocracy. Binner and Hill were there on past performance, not how they were playing when the team got picked.

But even ignoring that Binner got his spot on the team on reputation and/or the knowledge of what his best could be, he let up a bad goal against Sweden and a brutal goal against the US. Instead of shelving him for another option in game 3, Cooper stuck with him. Finland didn't trust Saros due to the season (and 1st game) he had and went with Lankinen who had been playing better. Lankinen cost them their tournament. They didn't go to Saros until they were down 4 and Saros stopped every puck he faced while looking like the top 5 goalie he's been in the past. Binner outplaying Lankinen was the reason Canada got to the championship and we could have witnessed a very different outcome if we had different goalies in net. Hell, even Saros vs Binner might have led to a different outcome. Canada/Finland was a fantastic window into a coach trusting his guys vs a coach relying on the hot hand.

No one is saying ignore present performance and only rely on past performance, but a 22 year old Neighbours isn't remotely comparable to veterans reaching the age cliff. And you are very much downplaying what Neighbours did at 5 on 5 by focusing on his points and not his goals. He was tied for 2nd on our team in 5 on 5 goals and 2nd in goals per 60 at 5 on 5. He absolutely has never driven play at 5 on 5, but he sure has hell has been a finisher of plays at 5 on 5. And frankly, the role he's played in the top 6 this year has been as a 3rd forward finisher and not the driver. he would have to drive play more on the 3rd line, so there is a real argument that trying to get him going as a finisher/passenger in the top 6 is better for the team than putting him on the 3rd line.

Neighbours isn't close to a finished product. He's 11 months older than Bolduc. We are very much still developing him and he has absolutely demonstrated more than Bolduc to merit getting the 'edge' in development decisions. And again, his leash has been shortening. Neighbours has had 4 games with less than 13 minutes of icetime this season and 3 of them came in the 5 games we played before the break. The other was 1/18/25. He's had 10 games under 14 minutes this year and 8 of them have occurred since the New Year. His play has absolutely caused a loss in ice time. Montgomery expanded his role coming out of the 4 Nations tournament and his line has scored a 5 on 5 goal in each game. He was driving the net on a 2-on-1 for one goal and he made the pass to a streaking Thomas in the neutral zone in the other. No points for him, but the line played really well both games and it is hard to criticize that coaching decision.

 

[Brian39]

Would you all give up Neighbors for Nemec?

Yes with almost no hesitation.

I think there is a slim chance that Neighbours rounds out his game to the point where he becomes a true monster power forward that makes you regret moving him, but my long-term view of Neighbours is that he is probably a middle 6 winger on a deep/contending forward group and a top 6 winger on decent or bad teams. I think he can play those roles effectively all season and I could very much see him elevating his game in the playoffs (or at least his style being very effective in the playoffs). I think he'll develop his ability to utilize teammates, but he will never be an above-average distributor of the puck. I think he'll improve his defensive and neutral zone coverage to roughly NHL average-to-slightly-above-average. He could be a damn good player that plays an important part in a deep playoff run. But I think the odds of him ever becoming a contender's 2nd or 3rd best winger are fairly slim. If he is that guy, I think it is similar to the role Barby is playing in Vegas where he is an incredibly important winger on a team that is good (and deep) at D and center.

Don't get me wrong. That's not a piece I give up lightly or something to scoff at. But Nemec has tons of paths to be more valuable than that. And the Blues are currently at a place in our organizational development where we can give him NHL minutes to grow. Nemec has top pair potential and I think is a reasonably safe bet to be a 2nd pair guy for a long time. Kyrou, Buch, and Holloway all ahead of Neighbours on the wing depth chart for the forseeable future. Bolduc is showing tons of promise as a middle 6 winger. Barring a trade demand, Snuggy will be competing for an NHL job soon. Stenberg has had a strong start to his AHL career. We are bursting with potential middle-to-top 6 wingers before you even start digging into some of our longer-term prospect projects that have taken leaps since being drafted.

We are very well suited to trade a guy like Neighbours for a high end right hand shot D prospect.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I don’t think it’s Neighbours’ fault that he has to play in the top 6 right now. So it goes on a bottom-10 team. Someone will eventually come along and push him down into a role he’s better suited for: a chippy, forechecking middle-6er with a unique (for us) ability to score from in tight.

But I think he’s the kind of guy you win championships with. I’d be very hesitant to trade him. He’s a rare kind of player who has proven he belongs at a young age, but isn’t ever going to threaten for like a $6m+ contract. In terms of managing the cap, those guys are pure gold.

Loves me some Jake, but getting another dynamic, young defenseman sounds pretty great. Before I get too excited, though, I want to learn more about Nemec's personality.

Jake's production can be replaced, but his personality cannot. He is a gem who will lift the Cup one day. He's got the VladyGumption on steroids. It's like an affliction that's infectious. Neighbours is the guy who drags the others along.

Is that energy (plus his 25 goals annual) more valuable over having another high-end, right-handed weapon on the back end? Cuz, at this point, Jiricek is about 50/50 to even make a dent in the NHL.

In the end, I would take the defensive talent over power winger gumption.

 

[Johnny97]

 

[Majorityof1]

...and Team Canada chose their goalies over at least 2 other guys who were having clearly better seasons when the roster was picked a quarter of the way through the NHL season. Thompson and Blackwood are both on team Canada in a 'right now' meritocracy. Binner and Hill were there on past performance, not how they were playing when the team got picked.

But even ignoring that Binner got his spot on the team on reputation and/or the knowledge of what his best could be, he let up a bad goal against Sweden and a brutal goal against the US. Instead of shelving him for another option in game 3, Cooper stuck with him. Finland didn't trust Saros due to the season (and 1st game) he had and went with Lankinen who had been playing better. Lankinen cost them their tournament. They didn't go to Saros until they were down 4 and Saros stopped every puck he faced while looking like the top 5 goalie he's been in the past. Binner outplaying Lankinen was the reason Canada got to the championship and we could have witnessed a very different outcome if we had different goalies in net. Hell, even Saros vs Binner might have led to a different outcome. Canada/Finland was a fantastic window into a coach trusting his guys vs a coach relying on the hot hand.

No one is saying ignore present performance and only rely on past performance, but a 22 year old Neighbours isn't remotely comparable to veterans reaching the age cliff. And you are very much downplaying what Neighbours did at 5 on 5 by focusing on his points and not his goals. He was tied for 2nd on our team in 5 on 5 goals and 2nd in goals per 60 at 5 on 5. He absolutely has never driven play at 5 on 5, but he sure has hell has been a finisher of plays at 5 on 5. And frankly, the role he's played in the top 6 this year has been as a 3rd forward finisher and not the driver. he would have to drive play more on the 3rd line, so there is a real argument that trying to get him going as a finisher/passenger in the top 6 is better for the team than putting him on the 3rd line.

Neighbours isn't close to a finished product. He's 11 months older than Bolduc. We are very much still developing him and he has absolutely demonstrated more than Bolduc to merit getting the 'edge' in development decisions. And again, his leash has been shortening. Neighbours has had 4 games with less than 13 minutes of icetime this season and 3 of them came in the 5 games we played before the break. The other was 1/18/25. He's had 10 games under 14 minutes this year and 8 of them have occurred since the New Year. His play has absolutely caused a loss in ice time. Montgomery expanded his role coming out of the 4 Nations tournament and his line has scored a 5 on 5 goal in each game. He was driving the net on a 2-on-1 for one goal and he made the pass to a streaking Thomas in the neutral zone in the other. No points for him, but the line played really well both games and it is hard to criticize that coaching decision.

Logan Thompson wasn't on the team due to politics, as he supposedly has a fractured relationship with Team Canada Assistant coach Cassidy. Cassidy's boss in the Canadian GM. I believe he should have been on the team, and there is no evidence they wouldn't have won with him. Canada was a stacked team.

Also, you are pointing out all the bad goals Binnington let up undercuts your own point. He happened to have a good game when it counted (and maybe that bolsters your point because that is his rep) but they almost didn't make it there. They didn't control their own destiny and needed other teams to lose because of the brutal goals he let up in an earlier game.

I'm not diminishing Neighbours goals. They are more important but assists matter too. On some plays, they matter more. I gave Neighbours a ton of credit last year for going hard to the net. Also valuable was the screens where he didn't get a point but led to someone else scoring from distance. But he's not doing it this year. And he hasn't been for 50 games.

Part of developing young guys is to give them consequences, and rewards. I am not saying we should arbitrarily jerk Neighbours around like we have Bolduc. But 300 minutes with top guys and no production, that can warrant a step down to allow the player to develop and give another player a chance to be rewarded for good work. IF Neighbours starts showing what led to those 27 goals again, then we can always bring him back up. If Montgomery is doing that, good on him.

But I think Bolduc should be rewarded with those minutes, and that isn't happening. in his last 10 he has been over 14 minutes 3 times. Once was coming off of a benching halfway through the game followed by 2 scratches for no reason anyone on this board could see. He got 16 minutes. Then he got a little over 14 in the 2 games before the break where he put up points. It is sending the message, if you don't score, you don't get shifts but don't be too aggressive, because I could bench you and scratch you for mistakes. After Bolduc scores 3 points in 2 games before the break, we go back to Neighbours getting prime ice time coming out of 4 nations for the next two games when Neighbours didn't earn it. He had 1 assist and a -5 in the 8 games before the break.

 

[Mike Liut]

I proposed the Neighbors for Nemec on the big board and they are all over it. They need a young cost controlled winger and are loaded on the back end.

Link? I couldn’t find it

 

[SirPaste]

Link? I couldn’t find it

Its in the Nemec + Mercer thread

 

[Mike Liut]

Its in the Nemec + Mercer thread

Gotcha. Thanks