Prospect Info: Caps Top Prospects General Discussion Thread Vol. 2 - 2021-22

[Langway]

They should be ahead of Calgary probably but it's pretty fair. That said, ranking Cristall's hockey sense and compete as equal? Chesley's skating better than Lapierre's? Miro's shot ahead of Leonard's? Allen's shot as above NHL average? McMichael's compete above average?

Pronman knocks most everyone's skating when the issue is often less central. Mostly it's IMO a tendency toward settling for the perimeter and/or not being physically mature. Those issues often aren't sufficiently improved but Wilson's skating improved quite a bit. Ditto Protas. It's definitely troubling for a smaller player given what else they'll need to overcome but there's zero rush as far as Cristall goes. Swap Allen & Cristall and I wouldn't find too much wrong with this ranking.

With McMichael I think it's more of a tenacity issue...not settling for the perimeter at times and being a bit casual. Same goes for Lapierre. His skating isn't strong but it's okay. With both it's likely also to do with strength level but if it's an issue even at the AHL level you've got to figure it stands to be a substantial one at the next one.

 

[usiel]

Prongman dings McMichael for sub-par skating. I've never though his skating was a problem as much as he needs to get stronger to win NHL battles - am I a kook for thinking that?

Pronman is just weird.

 

[Cush]

Top confirmation for IPK!

Washington Capitals contract player Ludwig Persson with a season-long loan agreement to Iisalmi

 

[Ridley Simon]

Is this good for the kid?

 

[Marshall]

Is this good for the kid?

Tomp posted this.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Tomp posted this.

Roger this. I read the article and I was thinking “isn’t Sweden pretty good too? Vs Finland?”

So I’m thinking — why change? I don’t get it. Unless the Swedish Club didn’t want him anymore.

 

[Holtbyisms]

Roger this. I read the article and I was thinking “isn’t Sweden pretty good too? Vs Finland?”

So I’m thinking — why change? I don’t get it. Unless the Swedish Club didn’t want him anymore.

A little early to use the B word but he's definitely trending the wrong direction at the moment.

 

[Ridley Simon]

A little early to use the B word but he's definitely trending the wrong direction at the moment.

3rd rounder. Yes? 2022?

Win some, lose some.

 

[trick9]

Is this good for the kid?

Well, he's going to get lots of minutes. Should be heads and shoulders the best player in that league, even at his age.

Then again, it's a pretty poor league. Swedish 2nd tier league is still pretty competitive... i don't think the same goes for Finnish 2nd tier league.

To me this is a bizarre move. Most Finnish prospects play in the top-tier. Basically only the top teams are ones that don't play their prospects in the top-league even before they are drafted and even then most times they loan those prospects to the bottom-tier teams.

I would take a wild guess though that Finnish 2nd tier league teams are most pretty broke and move their players to the FEL pretty often, so if he plays there well for a while he should be able to move to the FEL pretty quickly.

Either way with this move... 1) he's a bust or 2) he needs to fire his agent. Bizarre.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

His offensive production never matched his skill and talent level last year so maybe they think sending him to a different league will jumpstart him. I think he’s still in the picture for the Swedish Junior National Team (he played in the Four Nations Tournament for Sweden last August) and I think was a final cut for their WJC team so I think calling him a bust after his D+1 season is a bit harsh but this season is important for him.

 

[Jags]

With both it's likely also to do with strength level but if it's an issue even at the AHL level you've got to figure it stands to be a substantial one at the next one.

Definitely agree. If you're an elite prospect in the AHL, you can generally play perimeter hockey and wait for mistakes or create gaps with speed to get to the interior with ease and get by if your coaches don't correct you. That shit don't work in the NHL. They'll pin you to the outside and punish you on the boards if you're not proactive about forcing your game to the middle.

I think McMike knows this and will adjust, but it's time for him to prove it at the next level. Playing wing in the NHL might hamstring that development, but he needs to assert himself either way. Lapierre still has a step to take in this capacity for sure.

Either way with this move... 1) he's a bust or 2) he needs to fire his agent. Bizarre.

It's on him. Maybe landing in F2 was just how things worked out space-wise, but if he dominates there (and he should) then he'll get bumped up. He's still young enough for this to not be that big a deal, but he has to step up and earn it.

 

[twabby]

Pronman is just weird.

Is he really going to be that much worse than NHL scouts in general?

I don't even blame the guy. He probably has his own initial opinions but he also talks to scouts and their opinions likely influence his. A lot of groupthink in scouting seems to be the norm.

Also there are hundreds (thousands?) of prospects so how can one seriously put together an accurate ranking or value system? If relying on video or in-person viewings you'd need to watch thousands of hours of game tape per prospect to really measure how good these prospects are. It's an impossible job.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Is he really going to be that much worse than NHL scouts in general?

I don't even blame the guy. He probably has his own initial opinions but he also talks to scouts and their opinions likely influence his. A lot of groupthink in scouting seems to be the norm.

Also there are hundreds (thousands?) of prospects so how can one seriously put together an accurate ranking or value system? If relying on video or in-person viewings you'd need to watch thousands of hours of game tape per prospect to really measure how good these prospects are. It's an impossible job.

No……that’s where the whole “experience in the game“ matters, but you just dismiss that value.

 

[Hivemind]

Pronman isn't better or worse than other scouts, he's just particularly well known and isn't afraid to buck the trend on specific players. Sometimes he's right (he was the only one to rate Sebastian Aho in the top 30 in his draft class), sometimes he's wrong (rating Kotkaniemi as a top 5 pick... but Montreal thought even higher ).

 

[twabby]

No……that’s where the whole “experience in the game“ matters, but you just dismiss that value.

I think it's arrogant to think you can watch a player for a few games and get a good picture of who they are. No matter how skilled you are as a scout it's just not enough of a sample size to figure out a player.

How many times have you seen good players go through slumps in the NHL? Or bad players get hot for a few games before returning to their normal selves? If these were the few games you watched then your projection of a player going forward is going to be wildly inaccurate. World Junior performances in particular are held in such high regard despite them being such a small percentage of a prospect's career. Seems silly to me!

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I think it's arrogant to think you can watch a player for a few games and get a good picture of who they are. No matter how skilled you are as a scout it's just not enough of a sample size to figure out a player.

How many times have you seen good players go through slumps in the NHL? Or bad players get hot for a few games before returning to their normal selves? If these were the few games you watched then your projection of a player going forward is going to be wildly inaccurate. World Junior performances in particular are held in such high regard despite them being such a small percentage of a prospect's career. Seems silly to me!

I guess It looks arrogant to you maybe because you seemingly place no value in experience and knowledge gained over time In the profession of hockey. I‘d wager a pro scout can watch a game and tell you in 5 mins who is probably NOT going to be an NHL player with pretty good accuracy.

The thing is, Pro scouts don’t need to “figure out a player“. They are there to identify and recommend talents to the rest of the staff and Management. It’s up to the entire organization to try to “figure out“ the individuals and their draft worthiness.

 

[YippieKaey]

I think it's arrogant to think you can watch a player for a few games and get a good picture of who they are. No matter how skilled you are as a scout it's just not enough of a sample size to figure out a player.

How many times have you seen good players go through slumps in the NHL? Or bad players get hot for a few games before returning to their normal selves? If these were the few games you watched then your projection of a player going forward is going to be wildly inaccurate. World Junior performances in particular are held in such high regard despite them being such a small percentage of a prospect's career. Seems silly to me!

In those games it would be easy to spot fundamentals such as skating, technique, where the player moves on the ice etc. Much of the bust/success thing is mental, and a lot of coincidence.

 

[racingmoose]

I guess It looks arrogant to you maybe because you seemingly place no value in experience and knowledge gained over time In the profession of hockey. I‘d wager a pro scout can watch a game and tell you in 5 mins who is probably NOT going to be an NHL player with pretty good accuracy.

The thing is, Pro scouts don’t need to “figure out a player“. They are there to identify and recommend talents to the rest of the staff and Management. It’s up to the entire organization to try to “figure out“ the individuals and their draft worthiness.

As someone who was heavily involved in scouting for many years, I like this take. While there are differences amongst scouts in what they look for, same as any other profession, there are numerous intangibles that can make or break a player. The analytic only group who may not even watch a game doesn't really understand the intricacies of the sport and a successful pro athlete. Analytics have always been part of the process and what's available has increased, but it's only one piece of a multi piece puzzle.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

For eye test people this will be quite the prospect showcase at medstar

 

[Calicaps]

I guess It looks arrogant to you maybe because you seemingly place no value in experience and knowledge gained over time In the profession of hockey. I‘d wager a pro scout can watch a game and tell you in 5 mins who is probably NOT going to be an NHL player with pretty good accuracy.

The thing is, Pro scouts don’t need to “figure out a player“. They are there to identify and recommend talents to the rest of the staff and Management. It’s up to the entire organization to try to “figure out“ the individuals and their draft worthiness.

FTFY. Why limit it to hockey--or even sports?! Who needs doctors? Or teachers?

 

[Roshi]

I think it's arrogant to think you can watch a player for a few games and get a good picture of who they are. No matter how skilled you are as a scout it's just not enough of a sample size to figure out a player.

How many times have you seen good players go through slumps in the NHL? Or bad players get hot for a few games before returning to their normal selves? If these were the few games you watched then your projection of a player going forward is going to be wildly inaccurate. World Junior performances in particular are held in such high regard despite them being such a small percentage of a prospect's career. Seems silly to me!

I think its a little arrogant to think you know better after watching a spreadsheet, than professionals who do it 352 days a year. These guys also do have access to every spreadsheet you have seen, and a lot more. Its arrogant to think they dont use analytics as a tool, too.

Like Calicaps noted above, its somewhat saying Google propably could do health care better than doctors.

 

[Hivemind]

FTFY. Why limit it to hockey--or even sports?! Who needs doctors? Or teachers?

Like Calicaps noted above, its somewhat saying Google propably could do health care better than doctors.

I'm not particularly with Twabby on this topic*, but these notions are a bridge too far. This isn't a "Death of Expertise" thing. This isn't rejecting all of those who train in specific fields and learn things the laymen don't. Think is much more about calling into question the level of scrutiny that so-called "experts" in one particular field (hockey scouting) face. Hockey scouts have scrutiny on them, there's no question about that, but for most of pro hockey history that scrutiny has come from "inside the tent." Unlike Medicine, which has peer reviewed journals, professional associations, and federal regulators from numerous different countries watching it - the performance of hockey scouts is basically only judged by the same people who hired the scouts in the first place. If there's something rotten in the foundation, it's not going to be noticed or addressed. It can absolutely be an "old boys club." Public scrutiny of the overall performance exists, but the general public gets very little insight into which scout said what or pushed for which prospect. But as analytics improves, there are more and more objective metrics to evaluate scouting performance again, and it becomes more accessible to evaluate team scouting performance overall.

Baseball had to deal with this almost 20 years ago. Hockey, basketball, and soccer are all dealing with it (in varying degrees) now. All sports are also dealing with increasing automation and detection of "player tracking"-type analytics and measurables as well, even if they haven't really made their way to the amateur and minor-league levels yet. The idea that some of the age-old scouting practices are going to get called into question shouldn't be a controversial one. Some of the way team's do things is certainly very far from optimal. And, yes, some objective tracking of performance in scouting is going to be required in that process.


*I think amateur scouts are there to pick the guys who beat the expectation curve, even if that's a low success% task.

 

[Roshi]

I'm not particularly with Twabby on this topic*, but these notions are a bridge too far. This isn't a "Death of Expertise" thing. This isn't rejecting all of those who train in specific fields and learn things the laymen don't. Think is much more about calling into question the level of scrutiny that so-called "experts" in one particular field (hockey scouting) face. Hockey scouts have scrutiny on them, there's no question about that, but for most of pro hockey history that scrutiny has come from "inside the tent." Unlike Medicine, which has peer reviewed journals, professional associations, and federal regulators from numerous different countries watching it - the performance of hockey scouts is basically only judged by the same people who hired the scouts in the first place. If there's something rotten in the foundation, it's not going to be noticed or addressed. It can absolutely be an "old boys club." Public scrutiny of the overall performance exists, but the general public gets very little insight into which scout said what or pushed for which prospect. But as analytics improves, there are more and more objective metrics to evaluate scouting performance again, and it becomes more accessible to evaluate team scouting performance overall.

Baseball had to deal with this almost 20 years ago. Hockey, basketball, and soccer are all dealing with it (in varying degrees) now. All sports are also dealing with increasing automation and detection of "player tracking"-type analytics and measurables as well, even if they haven't really made their way to the amateur and minor-league levels yet. The idea that some of the age-old scouting practices are going to get called into question shouldn't be a controversial one. Some of the way team's do things is certainly very far from optimal. And, yes, some objective tracking of performance in scouting is going to be required in that process.


*I think amateur scouts are there to pick the guys who beat the expectation curve, even if that's a low success% task.

Thats not the point. We are not comparing doctors to scours or denying the value of having advanced stats.

Its about assuming that professional scouts of today just ”watch 3 games” and swing it from there. And saying spreadsheet can do it better.

 

[Hivemind]

Thats not the point. We are not comparing doctors to scours or denying the value of having advanced stats.

Its about assuming that professional scouts of today just ”watch 3 games” and swing it from there. And saying spreadsheet can do it better.

Then I'm a little confused as to what the point of mentioning doctors is. The reason we can trust most doctors above google is because of the scrutiny, accountability, & rigorous training associated with the medical profession. There isn't anywhere near that same level of scrutiny, accountability, or training associated with scouting.

To make a different comparison - arguing for valuing "expertise" without proper scrutiny is how we got to the situation where we're at with Umpires in baseball. And we've seen the "robot umpires" and video replay expose how bad some of these umpires are (and not just Angel Hernandez). These types of things weren't corrected when the only evaluation of umpires was by those "inside the tent" of baseball. A similar concept is being applied here, where objective evaluations are exposing how many NHL teams are beneath the curve when it comes to amateur drafting/development.

 

[twabby]

I think its a little arrogant to think you know better after watching a spreadsheet, than professionals who do it 352 days a year. These guys also do have access to every spreadsheet you have seen, and a lot more. Its arrogant to think they dont use analytics as a tool, too.

Like Calicaps noted above, its somewhat saying Google propably could do health care better than doctors.

NHLe has proven results over the current methods that most teams use. If that makes me arrogant then fine, I'm arrogant because I prefer the method that is better.

I'd be less concerned about figuring out why NHLe isn't perfect, as everyone here is doing, and more concerned about why scouts who do it 352 days a year are even worse.