Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Bruins Prospects XXV

MarchysNoseKnows said:
I don’t get this. You say “most models would have had Stiga having the better chance to be an NHL player 1 year ago”, yet he goes 55, and no draft projection had Stiga ranked above Letourneau. So why would he go so late?

Looking at one year for a draft pick who is a long term project is where the issue is. Hagens has been elite since he was 7 years old. Letourneau is a huge center who can skate and has hands. Everyone knows it’s going to take several years with him. If he scored another 4 goals and 8 assists this year it wouldn’t change the trajectory.
Click to expand...

Interesting... if that were true, how could it be that consolidated rankings from 20 different sources had Stiga ranked higher? If NOBODY had him above Letourneau this would be impossible. Now, you may be making a semantic argument about "projection" being different than Ranking... IDK, but either way that's a specious argument because just because some evaluators may be ranking by who they think are the best prospects, and others may be based on who they think NHL teams will think is the best... it's still clear that many people had Stiga ranked higher.

Here is the ranking: The 2024 NHL Draft Big Board - Compiled public prospect rankings - Sound Of Hockey

Some highlights:
Wheeler: Stiga 31/ Letourneau 36
Elite Prospects 23/Not ranked in top 32
Future Considerations 30/35
Smaht Scouting 20/HM
Dobber 20/55
Recruits Scouting 22/85
Draft Pro- 40/41

Were there others who had Letourneau higher? Sure, but I totally expect you to now acknowledge you were factually wrong and not move the goalposts.

Oh wait, no I don't expect that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GloryDaze4877, HustleB, LJReborn and 1 other person
Dr Quincy said:
Interesting... if that were true, how could it be that consolidated rankings from 20 different sources had Stiga ranked higher? If NOBODY had him above Letourneau this would be impossible. Now, you may be making a semantic argument about "projection" being different than Ranking... IDK, but either way that's a specious argument because just because some evaluators may be ranking by who they think are the best prospects, and others may be based on who they think NHL teams will think is the best... it's still clear that many people had Stiga ranked higher.

Here is the ranking: The 2024 NHL Draft Big Board - Compiled public prospect rankings - Sound Of Hockey

Some highlights:
Wheeler: Stiga 31/ Letourneau 36
Elite Prospects 23/Not ranked in top 32
Future Considerations 30/35
Smaht Scouting 20/HM
Dobber 20/55
Recruits Scouting 22/85
Draft Pro- 40/41

Were there others who had Letourneau higher? Sure, but I totally expect you to now acknowledge you were factually wrong and not move the goalposts.

Oh wait, no I don't expect that.
Click to expand...
He's too busy trying to score points on whether Sean McDonough should shame Detroit harder than Boston on tonight's broadcast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Quincy
Dr Quincy said:
Interesting... if that were true, how could it be that consolidated rankings from 20 different sources had Stiga ranked higher? If NOBODY had him above Letourneau this would be impossible. Now, you may be making a semantic argument about "projection" being different than Ranking... IDK, but either way that's a specious argument because just because some evaluators may be ranking by who they think are the best prospects, and others may be based on who they think NHL teams will think is the best... it's still clear that many people had Stiga ranked higher.

Here is the ranking: The 2024 NHL Draft Big Board - Compiled public prospect rankings - Sound Of Hockey

Some highlights:
Wheeler: Stiga 31/ Letourneau 36
Elite Prospects 23/Not ranked in top 32
Future Considerations 30/35
Smaht Scouting 20/HM
Dobber 20/55
Recruits Scouting 22/85
Draft Pro- 40/41

Were there others who had Letourneau higher? Sure, but I totally expect you to now acknowledge you were factually wrong and not move the goalposts.

Oh wait, no I don't expect that.
Click to expand...
Ok I’ll take the hit in the rankings. I was remembering it differently.

The point remains though - if these “models” are true why does he go 55? And regardless, the overall point is judging a pick like DL after one year versus players with a significant pedigree is specious. People hit on Sweeney for going with low ceiling guys in the late first (though I disagree with that assessment) - he goes for a giant center that’s a long term project and we’re judging by his first year stats.
 
MarchysNoseKnows said:
Ok I’ll take the hit in the rankings. I was remembering it differently.

The point remains though - if these “models” are true why does he go 55? And regardless, the overall point is judging a pick like DL after one year versus players with a significant pedigree is specious. People hit on Sweeney for going with low ceiling guys in the late first (though I disagree with that assessment) - he goes for a giant center that’s a long term project and we’re judging by his first year stats.
Click to expand...
I don't think this year is definitive on Letourneau. I think the only players we truly know about in their D+1 year are the ones who go directly to the pros and succeed. But that's like 1 or 2 guys a year. Everyone else you're either thinking... are they progressing, standing still or faltering. Dean's jump to the NCAA and his performance there is hard to judge. It's hard to know if he's progressed or what. Even had he played in the USHL this year I don't think we'd know a whole lot, other than if he struggled there it would be pretty bad for his future.

I think this is a better pick than WAS picking Parascak, who despite being a prolific JR scorer I don't think has the physical talent to be a scoring NHLer. But there are players that I think were safer and have a higher "likely" upside than Letourneau. I think next year will tell us a lot more, and even then nothing will be known for sure yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GloryDaze4877, bruinsfan1968 and CDJ
JayMark said:
Just what the Bruins need. More players that can hit the post. For me he's a major disappointment. Zero goals and 3 assists. And don't give me the " he's only a freshman" crap. So is James Hagens.
Click to expand...
To be fair, he played on the best team in college hockey, in the best conference. Also the league where he played last year is miles from even the USHL IMO.

We get mad when a guy like Lohrei is drafted and plays two plus years in the USHL and then we get mad when a guy skips the USHL all together and plays bottom line minutes as mostly an 18 year old.

I watched about a dozen games, not a lot but he was limited, unsure, stuff like that but this was a redshirt season once he went to BC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GloryDaze4877, MarchysNoseKnows and Saxon Eric
LJReborn said:
I want ELC for Walsh and Gasseau and in the Bruins lineup the next day after they sign.
Click to expand...

Gasseau should be a no brainer. Not sure if they sign one of the centers, but i would think they want to sign at least one of Walsh or Locmelis, this year but probably not both, they are pretty similar in many ways. Honestly if I were their advisor for either, I'd likely want to get to Providence first and take the chance to establish myself
 
Last edited:
MarchysNoseKnows said:
I like both players. Walsh needs another year. But why do you want to burn a year off their ELC? That would be GM incompetence for this level of player.
Click to expand...

Well it is all about what you think is going to be best for their development. IF Walsh signs this year he can sign a 3 year ELC (I believe), if he waits a year he can only sign a 2 year ELC so there is no difference.

Question is which do you think is best for his development. Playing 60+ games in the AHL against Pro's, or playing 35 games in the ECAC? There is an argument for both. If you think the player is not ready to compete in the AHL then maybe better they stay in college. If you think they player can compete in the AHL, they are likely better off there
 
JoeIsAStud said:
Gasseau should be a no brainer. Not sure if they sign one of the centers, but i would think they want to sign at least one of Walsh or Locmelis, this year but probably not both, they are pretty similar in many ways. Honestly if I were their advisor for either, I'd likely want to get to Providence first and take the chance to establish myself
Click to expand...
Locmelis is dead set on representing Latvia at the World Championships where he will probably be their number 1 center.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colt.45Orr, pearljamvs5, The Andrew Peeke Fan and 3 others
DominicT said:
Locmelis is dead set on representing Latvia at the World Championships where he will probably be their number 1 center.
Click to expand...

That is a this spring thing though, right? Seems Bruins could sign him for a 25/26 entry level contract, and still let him go to that rather than sending him down on an ATO deal? Or am I missing something there
 
JoeIsAStud said:
Well it is all about what you think is going to be best for their development. IF Walsh signs this year he can sign a 3 year ELC (I believe), if he waits a year he can only sign a 2 year ELC so there is no difference.

Question is which do you think is best for his development. Playing 60+ games in the AHL against Pro's, or playing 35 games in the ECAC? There is an argument for both. If you think the player is not ready to compete in the AHL then maybe better they stay in college. If you think they player can compete in the AHL, they are likely better off there
Click to expand...
Yeah that’s fair. Walsh is nowhere ready to play at the NHL level yet though. Personally I think Walsh is best suited being the top dog for another year but there are a lot of things that factor into it. I think Gasseau should come out and could very well play in the Calder Cup.
 
Dr Quincy said:
I don't think this year is definitive on Letourneau. I think the only players we truly know about in their D+1 year are the ones who go directly to the pros and succeed. But that's like 1 or 2 guys a year. Everyone else you're either thinking... are they progressing, standing still or faltering. Dean's jump to the NCAA and his performance there is hard to judge. It's hard to know if he's progressed or what. Even had he played in the USHL this year I don't think we'd know a whole lot, other than if he struggled there it would be pretty bad for his future.

I think this is a better pick than WAS picking Parascak, who despite being a prolific JR scorer I don't think has the physical talent to be a scoring NHLer. But there are players that I think were safer and have a higher "likely" upside than Letourneau. I think next year will tell us a lot more, and even then nothing will be known for sure yet.
Click to expand...
with the pick at 25 last year why not take Letourneau, you have no one in the pipeline that has anything sniffing first line potential, you always take safe third line ceiling/floor players, so try to hit a home run with the bases loaded, don’t strike out looking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom