Blues 2025-2026 Prospect Thread

[MissouriMook]

Continue from here...

Blues 2024-2025 Prospect Thread

 

[LogosBlue]

Athletic Top 100 Prospects Ranking - Blues players
Tier 3
27 - Jimmy Snuggerud (6th RW on list)
30 - Justin Carboneau (7th RW on list)
Tier 4
38 - Dalibor Dvorsky (12th C on list)
70 - Logan Mailloux (16 RD on list)
Tier 5
91 - Theo Lindstien

Just thought it would be interesting to post this from Scott Wheeler because we are doing our own rankings right now. Interesting to see where others think our prospects are. I'm not sure i agree with his rankings as i would put some of our prospects higher (in consideration of what other prospects have done. Draft ranking probably has something to do with this)

 

[BlueMed]

Athletic Top 100 Prospects Ranking - Blues players
Tier 3
27 - Jimmy Snuggerud (6th RW on list)
30 - Justin Carboneau (7th RW on list)
Tier 4
38 - Dalibor Dvorsky (12th C on list)
70 - Logan Mailloux (16 RD on list)
Tier 5
91 - Theo Lindstien

Just thought it would be interesting to post this from Scott Wheeler because we are doing our own rankings right now. Interesting to see where others think our prospects are. I'm not sure i agree with his rankings as i would put some of our prospects higher (in consideration of what other prospects have done. Draft ranking probably has something to do with this)

JC in a tier above Dvorsky? Hmm...

 

[kimzey59]

JC in a tier above Dvorsky? Hmm...

Wheeler has been ridiculously anti-Dvorsky since the Wings passed on him. And it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that he had Dvorsky at #8 in that Draft.

I don’t really consider Wheeler’s ratings all that serious. He plays to the big market teams to get clicks and he always puts newly drafted players in a tier above where they actually belong. Makes it really hard for me to consider him good when it comes to prospects(not bad with pre-draft rankings, but there’s a pallet of salt required for guys that have already been picked).

 

[Quaz]

I was listening to hockey prospect radio on SiriusXM and they were not very high on Carboneau at all. Had him as boom or bust. Questioned his hockey sense and playmaking ability. This was recorded before he made the decision to go back to the Q, and they were saying he definitely needs to go to BC if he wants to improve and that if the Blues rush him to the pros they will ruin his development. At this point I’m questioning why Armstrong made comments about him possibly making the team out of camp. I’m sure that factored into his decision to return to the Q. Hopefully he works on his weaknesses this year and doesn’t chase goals/points, and can make Team Canada for the WJC and have a good year.

 

[blueper]

I was listening to hockey prospect radio on SiriusXM and they were not very high on Carboneau at all. Had him as boom or bust. Questioned his hockey sense and playmaking ability. This was recorded before he made the decision to go back to the Q, and they were saying he definitely needs to go to BC if he wants to improve and that if the Blues rush him to the pros they will ruin his development. At this point I’m questioning why Armstrong made comments about him possibly making the team out of camp. I’m sure that factored into his decision to return to the Q. Hopefully he works on his weaknesses this year and doesn’t chase goals/points, and can make Team Canada for the WJC and have a good year.

I don't think anyone in the organization has a plan to rush any of the prospects. DA's line when talking about prospects is that organizations fail their prospects as often as prospects fail the organization. He doesn't want to put any player especially young prospects in a position to fail. Carbonneau chose to go back to the Q. The Blues would have supported his decision either way I think. They supported Snuggerud's decision to go back to college a year ago even though it wasn't what they expected or probably what they would have preferred. Players and their families have to be bought in on whatever path they choose as teenagers.

 

[rumrokh]

I don’t really consider Wheeler

Same. Ever.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

I was listening to hockey prospect radio on SiriusXM and they were not very high on Carboneau at all. Had him as boom or bust. Questioned his hockey sense and playmaking ability. This was recorded before he made the decision to go back to the Q, and they were saying he definitely needs to go to BC if he wants to improve and that if the Blues rush him to the pros they will ruin his development. At this point I’m questioning why Armstrong made comments about him possibly making the team out of camp. I’m sure that factored into his decision to return to the Q. Hopefully he works on his weaknesses this year and doesn’t chase goals/points, and can make Team Canada for the WJC and have a good year.

Counting on anyone outside of STL to effectively evaluate the Blues' prospects is almost always a doomed venture. The last time we drafted someone the scouting community was unanimously excited about might have been Robby Fabbri. By pretty much any metric, Dvorsky is doing better than Danielson at this point in their careers but because Danielson got drafted by the Wings, you hear more about his upside. Many such cases.

But to answer to your concerns: Armstrong has rarely ruined a player by bringing them on too early. If anything, he errs on over-marination and lets the runway fall out underneath them. Saying Carbonneau could push for a roster spot was probably just pumping the kid's tires after a good camp. Give him something to feel good about during summer training.

I don't quite understand the concern around "chasing" goals and points. Isn't that the purpose of a scoring winger? It isn't an either/or proposition; if you stop scoring because you're trying to play better all-around hockey, then you're failing. I.e. if Carbonneau scored 89 points playing hero hockey last year, adding an all-around element to his game should boost, not tank his stats.

 

[STL fan in MN]

I was listening to hockey prospect radio on SiriusXM and they were not very high on Carboneau at all. Had him as boom or bust. Questioned his hockey sense and playmaking ability. This was recorded before he made the decision to go back to the Q, and they were saying he definitely needs to go to BC if he wants to improve and that if the Blues rush him to the pros they will ruin his development. At this point I’m questioning why Armstrong made comments about him possibly making the team out of camp. I’m sure that factored into his decision to return to the Q. Hopefully he works on his weaknesses this year and doesn’t chase goals/points, and can make Team Canada for the WJC and have a good year.

Going to have to agree that hockey sense, playmaking and utilization of teammates are his biggest weaknesses currently. And also agree BC was probably a better place to work on those issues.

But the story of Army talking about Carbo possibly making the team out of camp is malarkey IMO, has taken a life of its own and is based on the game of telephone.

Below is the interview in which people interpreted Army as saying Carbonneau would have a good shot in camp. Skip to the 9:48 mark and listen to it for yourself.
President of Hockey Operations and General Manager for the St. Louis Blues, Doug Armstrong on the various moves made this summer in NHL free agency – 101 ESPN

The quotes I took from that were:

“He’s going to make it hard on us.” (referring to if he has a chance in camp)

“he looked good against his age group, now we’ll see how he looks against men.”

“if he comes to camp, I’m not going to be shocked if he makes some noise.”

So sure, if you want to be generous, one could interpret this as Army saying Carbonneau has a good chance of making the team out of camp. But having listened to Army speak for 17ish years now, I wholeheartedly disagree. To me, he’s simply talking the kid up. Paying him a compliment. Saying he expects Carbo to show well in camp. He’s also not going to say anyone coming into training camp has no shot of making the team. Of course it’s true many have really no shot but they should all be entering camp with the mindset of trying to make the team. So Army isn’t going to say otherwise.

To me, this whole “Army said Carbonneau is close to being NHL ready” crap is people that either can’t interpret stuff very well or they heard what they wanted to hear.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Especially in context of the timing. It's not that Army is doing it just for fan service, but there's definitely an aspect of it.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Counting on anyone outside of STL to effectively evaluate the Blues' prospects is almost always a doomed venture. The last time we drafted someone the scouting community was unanimously excited about might have been Robby Fabbri. By pretty much any metric, Dvorsky is doing better than Danielson at this point in their careers but because Danielson got drafted by the Wings, you hear more about his upside. Many such cases.

But to answer to your concerns: Armstrong has rarely ruined a player by bringing them on too early. If anything, he errs on over-marination and lets the runway fall out underneath them. Saying Carbonneau could push for a roster spot was probably just pumping the kid's tires after a good camp. Give him something to feel good about during summer training.

I don't quite understand the concern around "chasing" goals and points. Isn't that the purpose of a scoring winger? It isn't an either/or proposition; if you stop scoring because you're trying to play better all-around hockey, then you're failing. I.e. if Carbonneau scored 89 points playing hero hockey last year, adding an all-around element to his game should boost, not tank his stats.

Being objective, I got to see Danielson play against Springfield and he was very impressive. He was the best player on the ice and probably the best skater. He created lots of problems for our D that night on the forecheck and set up quite a few chances. Love to have him in our pool. I would rate him over Dvo at this point. He will definitely play at the next level.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Being objective, I got to see Danielson play against Springfield and he was very impressive. He was the best player on the ice and probably the best skater. He created lots of problems for our D that night on the forecheck and set up quite a few chances. Love to have him in our pool. I would rate him over Dvo at this point. He will definitely play at the next level.

Yeah, not hating on Danielson at all. But he's ~10 months older than Dvorsky, and was outproduced by him in both the AHL and the WJCs. It's not a huge margin in either case, but still. I'll take Dvorsky at this point personally.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Yeah, not hating on Danielson at all. But he's ~10 months older than Dvorsky, and was outproduced by him in both the AHL and the WJCs. It's not a huge margin in either case, but still. I'll take Dvorsky at this point personally.

Dvo will most likely outscore him whether he stays at center or not, but I see Danielson being the better defensive center. He maybe good enough to be a #2. We shall see.

 

[BleedBlue14]

Wheeler has been ridiculously anti-Dvorsky since the Wings passed on him. And it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that he had Dvorsky at #8 in that Draft.

I don’t really consider Wheeler’s ratings all that serious. He plays to the big market teams to get clicks and he always puts newly drafted players in a tier above where they actually belong. Makes it really hard for me to consider him good when it comes to prospects(not bad with pre-draft rankings, but there’s a pallet of salt required for guys that have already been picked).

Looking at that article as well he put way too much of an emphasis on sliding recently drafted prospects up higher than they should be (Carbonneau included). Assuming like your points, it's to drive more traffic which is fine - but like you I also don't put much stock on there. The one takeaway on here is that the Blues have 5 guys on the list and somehow we always end up in the 15 -20 range in prospect rankings which I don't fully understand. But from the fan's perspective i think it's safe to say our prospect pool and future is in a really good spot especially when you look at the large core of players being our main contributors that are 23-26

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't have as much of an issue with recent picks being high on a ranking because the ranking should be what you think their career will look like, not a ranking that takes into account readiness or how close they are. I know many of us take that into account, but it's a way to kind of mitigate against risk and unknown.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Going to have to agree that hockey sense, playmaking and utilization of teammates are his biggest weaknesses currently. And also agree BC was probably a better place to work on those issues.

But the story of Army talking about Carbo possibly making the team out of camp is malarkey IMO, has taken a life of its own and is based on the game of telephone.

Below is the interview in which people interpreted Army as saying Carbonneau would have a good shot in camp. Skip to the 9:48 mark and listen to it for yourself.
President of Hockey Operations and General Manager for the St. Louis Blues, Doug Armstrong on the various moves made this summer in NHL free agency – 101 ESPN

The quotes I took from that were:

“He’s going to make it hard on us.” (referring to if he has a chance in camp)

“he looked good against his age group, now we’ll see how he looks against men.”

“if he comes to camp, I’m not going to be shocked if he makes some noise.”

So sure, if you want to be generous, one could interpret this as Army saying Carbonneau has a good chance of making the team out of camp. But having listened to Army speak for 17ish years now, I wholeheartedly disagree. To me, he’s simply talking the kid up. Paying him a compliment. Saying he expects Carbo to show well in camp. He’s also not going to say anyone coming into training camp has no shot of making the team. Of course it’s true many have really no shot but they should all be entering camp with the mindset of trying to make the team. So Army isn’t going to say otherwise.

To me, this whole “Army said Carbonneau is close to being NHL ready” crap is people that either can’t interpret stuff very well or they heard what they wanted to hear.

Telephone:

The team will make sure he makes it to training camp.

I’m sure he will make the team out of training camp.

 

[Quaz]

Going to have to agree that hockey sense, playmaking and utilization of teammates are his biggest weaknesses currently. And also agree BC was probably a better place to work on those issues.

But the story of Army talking about Carbo possibly making the team out of camp is malarkey IMO, has taken a life of its own and is based on the game of telephone.

Below is the interview in which people interpreted Army as saying Carbonneau would have a good shot in camp. Skip to the 9:48 mark and listen to it for yourself.
President of Hockey Operations and General Manager for the St. Louis Blues, Doug Armstrong on the various moves made this summer in NHL free agency – 101 ESPN

The quotes I took from that were:

“He’s going to make it hard on us.” (referring to if he has a chance in camp)

“he looked good against his age group, now we’ll see how he looks against men.”

“if he comes to camp, I’m not going to be shocked if he makes some noise.”

So sure, if you want to be generous, one could interpret this as Army saying Carbonneau has a good chance of making the team out of camp. But having listened to Army speak for 17ish years now, I wholeheartedly disagree. To me, he’s simply talking the kid up. Paying him a compliment. Saying he expects Carbo to show well in camp. He’s also not going to say anyone coming into training camp has no shot of making the team. Of course it’s true many have really no shot but they should all be entering camp with the mindset of trying to make the team. So Army isn’t going to say otherwise.

To me, this whole “Army said Carbonneau is close to being NHL ready” crap is people that either can’t interpret stuff very well or they heard what they wanted to hear.

I will have to re-listen to the interview. It's possible I was going off of what the interviewers ran with after the interview. My impression after the interview was that Carbonneau would go back to the Q so he can attend the Blues camp. I hope he gets a lot of benefit from going to NHL camp and has a good year. Bolduc had the same stigma of not being good defensively and he was able to be passable after one year in the AHL. The chasing goals and points was a reference from the Hockey Prospects guys on NHL Radio. Hopefully with more talent on his team Carbonneau won't feel the need to do everything himself and can round out his game.

 

[Brian39]

Wheeler has been ridiculously anti-Dvorsky since the Wings passed on him. And it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that he had Dvorsky at #8 in that Draft.

I don’t really consider Wheeler’s ratings all that serious. He plays to the big market teams to get clicks and he always puts newly drafted players in a tier above where they actually belong. Makes it really hard for me to consider him good when it comes to prospects(not bad with pre-draft rankings, but there’s a pallet of salt required for guys that have already been picked).

He had Dvorsky 16th in this ranking in the summer of 2023 after the draft, which made him the 8th highest guy from the 2023 draft. He rated him as our best prospect over Snuggy that summer too. He didn't start souring on him until midway through the 2023/24 season with the really rough start in the SHL.

I don't think it has anything to do with the Wings passing on him. His highest-ranked Wings prospect right now is 29th and is a guy that most people around here were salivating over when we were desperate for LHD. Danielson (the guy the wings picked instead of Dvorsky) is currently ranked a whopping 2 spots higher than Dvo and has looked pretty damn good in the AHL. Dvorsky is the better offensive player, but Danielson's game without the puck is pretty noticeably better than Dvo's. I really don't find it ridiculous to like Danielson ever so slightly more than Dvorsky.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I remember Danielson was highly-rated around here.

 

[blueper]

If Danielson is a plus skater, there's a pretty difference between the two in that category, right?

 

[ChicagoBlues]

If Danielson is a plus skater, there's a pretty difference between the two in that category, right?

I don’t like the Red Wings after all those years of hatred, but I don’t hate them anymore. I’d like to see Danielson succeed, in spite of Yzerman and his dumbassery.

 

[LetsGoBooze]

I don't have as much of an issue with recent picks being high on a ranking because the ranking should be what you think their career will look like, not a ranking that takes into account readiness or how close they are. I know many of us take that into account, but it's a way to kind of mitigate against risk and unknown.

This is so true, i vote off of career upside. But based on our prospect rankings every year, lots of the posters on our board weigh heavily into NHL readiness. I heavily disagree with that thought process. Give me the best player 5-6 years down the road, couldn't care less if he's currently younger and takes a few more years to make our NHL roster.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

This is so true, i vote off of career upside. But based on our prospect rankings every year, lots of the posters on our board weigh heavily into NHL readiness. I heavily disagree with that thought process. Give me the best player 5-6 years down the road, couldn't care less if he's currently younger and takes a few more years to make our NHL roster.

We’ve had this discussion before. ‘Career upside’ is another way to say ‘ceiling’. If a guy is closer to NHL ready, often they have overcome some of the obstacles that hold them back from realizing their ceiling. There is less uncertainty.

That’s how I vote. It’s not because he’s NHL ready. But being advanced in his development makes it more likely the ceiling will be reached.

Assume the Blues had kept Bokk. How would you have rated him over his 5 years post draft? If you downgraded him, what was the basis? He was failing to do exactly what I’m upgrading other guys for.

 

[LetsGoBooze]

I rate a guy at his ceiling and then i downgrade from there based on development over time. Bokk obviously falls over time as his development stalled. But rarely would i raise a guys ceiling just because he's on track to make the NHL. Dont get me wrong, thats a good reason to keep him rated similarly, but im not gonna upgrade a guy for having steady development. In rare cases, raising a guys ceiling over the first few years of development is warranted. I just don't believe it applies to many, if any of our current prospects. Are some on a great path to reach their ceilings? Absolutely. But none really have shocked so much that they have busted through their original ceiling.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I rate them based on what I project them to be. It’s not ceiling for me, so jiriicek has higher ceiling but more uncertainty than guy like Stenberg. Readiness affects floor for me, so guy like Snuggy we know he is an nhl player already. As we get further out from draft year the range of outcomes tends to narrow, so as guy like Bokk or Kostin fails to progress as much as expected , you rank them lower in successive years.